ProofHub vs. ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier™ (RQ)

It suits well for those businesses who want to operate on a global level without investing too much over creating infrastructure. A business can easily reach out to various clients, customers, partners and other stakeholders and communicate and collaborate with them in a fast and transparent manner and can effectively tap any opportunities coming its way. Such opportunities if
properly implemented can lead to gains for the parties involved.

Well-Suited Scenarios: Reporting to management where financial risk metrics are required. - Vulnerability prioritization when you need to rank issues by real exploit risk and financial/business impact. Less-Appropriate Scenarios: Fast-changing cloud environments where asset data needs updates too frequently for accurate models required all the time. - Incident investigation, as ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier™ (RQ) is not designed for real-time check

• The obvious, proofing! We need something in-house that can do this instead of hiring one person for this job. Each person on our marketing team knows how to use it.
• Organizes team projects in a friendly way.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Provides scenario-based modeling to measure risk, which can be reduced through patches or new controls.
• Delivers technical-to-business reporting that supports remediation planning and financial budget planning.
• Ranks vulnerabilities by exploit risk and business impact
• Quantifies cyber risk in financial terms using vulnerability, threat, and asset data.

• Proofhub can improve a bit in areas of helping people customize their accounts a bit more. That makes managing work even more easier, when you have things just the way you want them to be.

• Dashboards can be customized to offer more options, especially for technical teams that require deeper drill-downs and also more simpler and user-friendly.
• Processing large data files can be slow sometimes, especially during large builds or bulk updates.
• Risk modules sometimes need manual intervention for multi-client environments, which can be time-consuming.

With an array of useful features available that solve all our work issues, each department has an access to it. Each one knows what’s going on with different teams. This makes collaboration easier, as different teams just need one tool to come together and get things done. I think this is a great product! it has really helped my company get MUCH better organized.

It's convenient, simple, and clear.

I rate ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier™ (RQ) an 8 because it’s generally easy to use once the integrations are set up. The dashboards, risk scores, and financial impact metrics are very straightforward and help make quick decisions for executives. However, the initial configuration and model tuning can be a bit complex it's not a perfect 10 for me.

Great support website and had reps follow up multiple times in our trial process. Getting started was very straightforward and adding people is easy too.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

We used Basecamp in the past, but we did encounter some problems while working with it. But these concerns have been better addressed in ProofHub. It has a simple interface which is so easy to operate and this was not the case in Basecamp. ProofHub lets us quickly chat with our team members over various work matters through its inbuilt chat feature and resolve them fast while Basecamp provides this feature through a third-party tool which added to our expenses and it was not a very convenient affair. ProofHub has got an inbuilt proofing tool which allows us to get quality feedback over designs instantly saving our time and costs, whereas Basecamp enables proofing through a third party tool which again was not convenient for us. ProofHub’s casper mode feature helps us to protect privacy and secrecy over confidential issues but Basecamp lacks such an important feature. So ProofHub has more to offer and better too in comparison to Basecamp. (answer to Describe how ProofHub stacks up against them and why you selected ProofHub.

ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier™ (RQ) stacked up better than RiskLens, better for our organization, is mainly because it integrates directly with our scanners, SIEM, and CMDB, allowing automatic, real-time risk monitoring. It also combines exploit intel, asset value, and vulnerability data more efficiently, giving us clearer technical priorities for the business impact. We chose ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier™ (RQ) because it provides faster, more actionable risk scoring with less manual modeling than RiskLens.

• Proofhub has a great impact on our ROI. Due to a systematic approach of handling each clients’ project, we have been able to double the number of clients we had prior to signing up for Proofhub.

• Improved alignment between IT, security, and business teams because risk is measured in financial terms, not just technical terms.
• It gives leadership clear cost-based risk metrics, making it easier to justify security budgets and prioritize projects.
• Initial setup and data integration require time and more disruption to the existing setup
• Risk models sometimes need tuning, adding extra operational overhead.