Archer Reviews & Ratings

4.6/5

“Vendor risk module worked well, but cost is high”

In my vendor-risk team we used Archer’s vendor risk module to assess suppliers, issue question¬naires, track remediation and monitor controls. It worked well. But the licensing and support cost was higher than alternative tools we looked at.

Pros : Many large organisations use Archer for third-party risk management, vendor risk and supply-chain risk.

Cons : Some feedback points to high cost and high resource requirement, especially for smaller modules.

Switched from : Hyperproof

Reason to switch : We switched because our previous vendor?risk tool lacked other GRC domains; Archer let us consolidate across vendor risk, audit and compliance though at higher cost.

4.5/5

“Implementation took longer than expected”

We embarked on a full GRC rollout with Archer. It did deliver the breadth we needed (risk, compliance, audit) but the project timeline stretched. We underestimated how much process redesign and training were needed.

Pros : The platform is very capable and covers many domains, as users say.

Cons : While the solution was manageable, it was not a sustainable platform for my team.

Switched from : NAVEX

Reason to switch : We switched because our old GRC tool was easy to implement but couldn’t scale; we accepted longer rollout in exchange for a platform that could scale with us.

4.5/5

“Flexible but we needed a big team to run it”

I work for a large enterprise, and we wanted one GRC platform rather than many point solutions. Archer allowed us to cover audit, vendor risk, IT risk, operational risk in one place. But yes, it required internal resource and training to deploy effectively.

Pros : Archer is highly customizable and supports many use-cases.

Cons : Because it’s so powerful, some features require specialist administrators or consultants.

Switched from : Colline

Reason to switch : We switched because our many separate tools cost more, duplicated data, and lacked a unified view. Archer let us consolidate, even if it required more internal investment.

4.5/5

“Customization allowed us to adapt but took time”

We needed to build custom risk assessments, vendor onboarding, control frameworks, and Archer gave us the tools. But our initial build took longer than expected because we tailored it deeply.

Pros : Archer supports custom workflows, modules and control libraries.

Cons : Extensive customisation can introduce complexity and increase maintenance overhead.

Switched from : Lawyer

Reason to switch : We switched because our old off-the-shelf tool lacked flexibility for our unique workflows. Archer allowed deeper fit to our processes.

4.5/5

“Good for enterprise scale, not so much for small teams”

At our large firm (5000+ employees), we implemented Archer to centralize risk processes across business units. It works well for scale: many users, many domains. But I could see smaller teams feeling overwhelmed by the features.

Pros : Leading tool in this space.

Cons : Smaller companies find it complex and resource-intensive.

Switched from : Volody Contract LifeCycle Management

Reason to switch : We switched because our legacy lightweight tool couldn’t handle enterprise scale, many domains or complex workflows. Archer handled the complexity we needed.

4.3/5

“Integration capabilities helped our ecosystem”

We have many systems (finance, HR, vendor management) and wanted to bring risk data together. Archer allowed us to link to those systems and bring data into risk dashboards, which increased accuracy and visibility. Implementation required effort though.

Pros : Archer supports integration with other business systems, operational data and provides enterprise visibility.

Cons : Integrations sometimes required custom work or middleware; not always plug-and-play.

Switched from : GRC SoftExpert

Reason to switch : We switched because our old tool was isolated and we couldn’t integrate operational data; Archer solved that.

4.3/5

“Powerful risk dashboards really helped us”

In my risk-management role, I needed a system that could bring together audit findings, vendor risk, and compliance gaps in one place. Archer let us build our custom workflows and dashboards for these in one platform. It took a little time to learn, but once we did, visibility improved.

Pros : Archer gives us excellent dashboards and a flexible workflow engine.

Cons : The user interface feels a bit old and not very intuitive.

Switched from : Vanta

Reason to switch : We switched because our old tool had limited dashboards, weak workflow automation and didn’t scale across many risk domains. Archer gave us a more complete view of risk across the business.

4.3/5

“Good dashboards give visibility, but navigation is steep”

As a risk officer I love opening the dashboard and getting a view of key metrics across departments. But when I’m drilling down to details it sometimes requires multiple clicks and navigation paths which are not always intuitive.

Pros : Provide flexible overview of operational risk and eGRC capabilities

Cons : System can be a bit more intuitive and streamlined.

Switched from : Colline

Reason to switch : We switched because our previous tool’s dashboards were too generic and lacked detail; Archer’s dashboards appealed—but we accepted the navigation trade-off.

4.3/5

“Strong for compliance and audit, but UI could be better”

As compliance lead, I appreciated Archer’s ability to align risks, controls and compliance frameworks in one system. We could show auditors the evidence trail. But training for some non-technical users was necessary because the UI wasn’t always simple.

Pros : Archer excels in compliance management, audit tracking and risk control mapping.

Cons : Not so user friendly.

Switched from : Inszoom

Reason to switch : We switched because our old audit tool didn’t integrate risks and compliance well, and required separate systems for each. Archer gave more alignment across audit and GRC.

4.3/5

“Strong for compliance and audit, but UI could be better”

As compliance lead, I appreciated Archer’s ability to align risks, controls and compliance frameworks in one system. We could show auditors the evidence trail. But training for some non-technical users was necessary because the UI wasn’t always simple.

Pros : Archer excels in compliance management, audit tracking and risk control mapping.

Cons : Not so user friendly.

Switched from : Inszoom

Reason to switch : We switched because our old audit tool didn’t integrate risks and compliance well, and required separate systems for each. Archer gave more alignment across audit and GRC.