MetricStream Platform vs. Riskonnect IRM vs. SAP Risk Management

MetricStream is well suited for when you need to pull a report into Excel for further analysis. It is not good for when information needs to be entered as this is all done manually by analysts and managers. If we can implement a way to take parts of uploaded documents and have the system automatically enter the information in the designated fields in MetricStream, it would cut out lots of manual work for our department.

Incentivized

Well-suited: - Managing regulatory compliance across multiple regions with centralized monitoring. - Tracking financial risks like credit exposure, loan repayments, and investment volatility. - Assessing operational risks in supply chains or IT systems to prevent disruptions. Less appropriate: - Small organizations with limited risk complexity, where the system may feel too heavy. - Situations needing real-time external data integration (IoT, third-party feeds), which can be cumbersome. - Highly customized analytics or predictive modeling, as standard dashboards are rigid.

Incentivized

• Easy to navigate.

Incentivized

• Speed/efficiency.
• Missing functionality: Uploading documents (Excel sheets) into MetricStream and being able to pull information from that form into the program.
• Improve number of outages and time that it is out for.

Incentivized

Archer is more risk-management-friendly in that it has a better interface and more room to conduct risk-related tasks and pull reports.

Incentivized

• It keeps records of all of our vendors and the corresponding documents.
• Other departments can access information on vendors.

Incentivized