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 ability to keep a record of internal incidents in the company, and also the monitoring of Key Indicators."
"The content, reporting, and workflow features stand out as the most valuable aspects."
"The product’s interface is very intuitive."
"It has the best workload management features."
"The solution has improved my organization by having everything combined to a single platform."
"I have found all the features to be valuable, including those involving reporting, the dashboard, notifications, email modules, the database and data input."
"The most valuable part of the product is the ease-of-use and the opportunity to create custom security applications easily."
"It is a very friendly tool. We can easily understand what is going on inside the tool. I like this tool. We can work with the tool for the ERP platform. We can create automated applications based on the requirements."
"Its user interface is pretty neat, and there is flexibility in generating the data. You can customize reports at any level. You can directly get reports in Tableau format. If you want to generate statistical data, you can create reports with graphs. There is an adequate amount of flexibility for changing the format, the type of graphs, etc."
"The most valuable features of RSA Archer are the asset management, risk management, and vendor management."
"With RSA Archer, an admin can set permissions for a normal user to go directly to the tool they need to input some data. Admins can then go through that and approve some requests. Also, they can log in based on these kinds of permissions, including ticketing, service patches, or upgrades."
"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."
"I believe there's room for improvement in establishing connections with external information."
"The solution must allow customization in reporting."
"GUI could be improved."
"The bullet chart is the best graph for my purposes, and it should be available for inclusion in the dashboards."
"The financial area of RSA Archer has room for improvement."
"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."
"There were so many problems that we had found. One time, the search index was not working. We also faced slowness in Archer, but I resolved this issue."
"Some of the error reporting isn't very clear. When you're looking for information on error codes, you got to do a lot of digging."
"When we have to do formulas or some other type of calculation in Archer, it sometimes doesn't work correctly. The fields don't display right, and we have to contact RSA Archer support to fix things. I think the calculation components are a bit complicated."
"Some areas are not truly automated but are only scheduled."
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.