We performed a comparison between Galvanize HighBond 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 most valuable feature is automation."
"I like how Archer requires very little programming ability. A person with minimum coding experience can configure the necessary fields in Archer. It's more of a drag-and-drop solution."
"The integrated data model of a one-to-many/many-to-one relationship is quite useful."
"The most valuable features of RSA Archer are the asset management, risk management, and vendor management."
"RSA Archer has reduced the time and effort required for meetings."
"Enables development of any application, automation of any workflow including the GRC work processes."
"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."
"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."
"Easy to implement with a high level of automation."
"The cost of the solution is expensive and needs improvement."
"RSA Archer might be a bit expensive for small companies because it's a vast tool."
"The ticket handling process could be improved."
"I would like to have the ability to build and maintain an inventory of personal data processing activities and assets utilizing a purpose-built taxonomy and data structure."
"The design and advanced workflow need to be improved."
"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."
"There is no inbuilt alert in Archer to let us know that a data feed has failed or did not run for different reasons. So, we don't even get to know that a feed has not run until somebody reports it to us. This has been a problem all the time. Data feeds have always been a big headache for us because there is no feature to let us know if a feed has not run or has failed. If Archer had a feature to send us an email notification when a feed has failed, it would've been very helpful. This is the reason why our users are slowly moving away to another platform. Some of the modules that I have been managing are being moved to ServiceNow. Next year, a lot of our modules will be moved from RSA Archer to ServiceNow, and the data feed issue has been one of the main reasons."
"The technology's a little outdated."
"The first improvement I would suggest for RSA Archer is a better search feature. The search criteria needs to be improved. Sometimes I do a search and the search doesn't return the exact item I'm looking for. RSA Archer could also be improved by being more user-friendly. Maybe I have been using a limited version of RSA Archer, but I'm not sure whether it has ESG, environmental and social governance. In the next couple of years, ESG is the next feature that will be integrated into GRC tools. I would recommend RSA Archer adds ESG."
Galvanize HighBond is ranked 9th in GRC with 3 reviews while RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews. Galvanize HighBond is rated 8.6, while RSA Archer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Galvanize HighBond writes "Good automation and analytics, but is costly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". Galvanize HighBond is most compared with ACL Analytics and Workiva Wdesk, whereas RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, IBM OpenPages, MetricStream, Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance and Workiva Wdesk. See our Galvanize HighBond vs. RSA Archer report.
See our list of best GRC vendors, best IT Governance vendors, and best IT Vendor Risk Management 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.