We performed a comparison between IBM OpenPages and RSA Archer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two GRC solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The content, reporting, and workflow features stand out as the most valuable aspects."
"The product’s interface is very intuitive."
"The ability to keep a record of internal incidents in the company, and also the monitoring of Key Indicators."
"The solution has helped our organization manage our internal and external activities."
"First of all, its access control feature where it provides application level access, solution level access, and even recall access, as well."
"The solution has improved my organization by having everything combined to a single platform."
"Good dashboards and reporting features; it's easy to gather reports quickly."
"This solution helped us with the centralization of our governance data, so we could house all of our controls in one place. We could use that central repository of all our controls to build our risk management strategy and our policy and governance. So we could use controls as a central library and build policy, and then build risk management around it."
"RSA Archer is a good tool and I have found performing the application, ISMS, and TPRM assessments beneficial."
"Integration is another great aspect of RSA Archer. From the beginning, integration has been a central focus for RSA, and Archer has always integrated well with most tools on the market today."
"RSA is a very rich application. I like its adaptive suggestion, where based on your users and the class of data, it can actually recommend you the proper control to choose. For example, we have been using PCI DSS as an NIST. So based on application feedback, it will provide you with a suggestion on which control objective needs to be set. Based on that, you can make a decision—you don't need to take the suggestion, but you can customize that particular provided suggestion. RSA Archer's workflow is also good, in terms of process automation."
"IBM OpenPages needs improvement in its UI. Currently, it is difficult to see the relationships (associations/parents) between all items unless you click on the item itself."
"The solution must allow customization in reporting."
"I believe there's room for improvement in establishing connections with external information."
"An area for improvement would be the user interface. They could also offer more on-demand applications free of cost."
"RSA Archer's best features are advanced workflow, reports, dashboards, and notifications."
"The product is expensive."
"There should be a way to export and get data from the system in PDF or PowerPoint presentation format. This would be a great addition."
"The financial area of RSA Archer has room for improvement."
"The user interface needs work. There are many small text boxes, like credit card size's boxes, where we need to input a lot of text. You can't see what you're typing beyond the tiny window, so you have to scroll or type elsewhere and copy-paste it. It's very inconvenient."
"I would like to see real-time data, from vulnerabilities, and threats."
"It would be useful for customers if COBIT 2019 could be translated into different languages."
IBM OpenPages is ranked 8th in GRC with 5 reviews while RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews. IBM OpenPages is rated 6.6, while RSA Archer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM OpenPages writes "Enables us to manage global workflow and users' relationships with the links". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". IBM OpenPages is most compared with MetricStream, OneTrust GRC, SAP BusinessObjects GRC, AuditBoard and SAS Enterprise GRC, whereas RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, MetricStream, Workiva Wdesk, AuditBoard and Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance. See our IBM OpenPages vs. RSA Archer report.
See our list of best GRC vendors and best IT Governance vendors.
We monitor all GRC reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.