No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AuditBoard vs SecurityScorecard comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AuditBoard
Ranking in IT Vendor Risk Management
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
GRC (6th)
SecurityScorecard
Ranking in IT Vendor Risk Management
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
AI Legal & Compliance (2nd), AI Procurement & Supply Chain (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the IT Vendor Risk Management category, the mindshare of AuditBoard is 5.1%, down from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SecurityScorecard is 4.9%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Vendor Risk Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SecurityScorecard4.9%
AuditBoard5.1%
Other90.0%
IT Vendor Risk Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2562750 - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Streamlined workflow and enhanced simplicity with an easy setup
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look at risks and controls The collaboration within my team had not yet significantly changed since…
AG
Application security engineer at a media company with 51-200 employees
Vendor risk monitoring has strengthened our security posture and reduced insurance costs
In terms of improvements, I feel SecurityScorecard could enhance some of the integrations based on AI platforms, where I could receive suggestions from the AI tool regarding why SecurityScorecard rates specific issues as critical or high. Details on the technical mitigation would help my non-technical teams understand the security issues better. I think improvements could be made on the reporting side as well, such as the ability to download customizable reports. While SecurityScorecard offers various kinds of reports now, they are limited to predefined formats. Having the ability to choose specific fields for an automated report would be very helpful.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I find the most significant elements of this solution are the out-of-the-box reporting, the ease of workflow, workflow management, and the ease of managing our audit process."
"For AuditBoard, the simple workflow made it very easy to code with the group."
"AuditBoard is very user-friendly compared to other audit management software I have used in the past."
"The most significant feature of AuditBoard is its community tools. It provides an internal communication platform that enables users to communicate within the system rather than relying on external tools such as Outlook or Microsoft products. By communicating within the system, all interactions are centralized and accessible, promoting a streamlined workflow."
"The most valuable feature is that everybody can use the same tool. You can give a person permission to use AuditBoard and define their access to the Audit Table. For example, we can allow external auditors or clients to review our completed tests. The clients are attached to specific tests that happen regularly, like inventory counts and asset counts. Debt compliance is only done once annually."
"AuditBoard has several solutions for governance, internal audit, and other categories."
"The most valuable feature of AuditBoard is its ability to facilitate the editing of work papers in a seamless and efficient manner. This is achieved through a built-in tool that allows for real-time editing without the need for downloading the working paper. This feature has proven to be incredibly time-saving for me as it eliminates the step of having to download the file and make changes, instead providing an easy-to-access "edit work paper" option. Overall, this feature has greatly improved my experience with AuditBoard and has been a significant contributor to its success in my opinion."
"Considering the solution's return on investment, it has been extremely helpful since we were doing a lot of documentation. Previously, in our company, we were using an Excel sheet which made things quite messy."
"Fortify Data offers attack surface capabilities that identify vulnerabilities, exposed ports, and dark web information."
"The best features SecurityScorecard offers for me are mainly being able to properly position my organization's security posture because of the score that is provided."
"One of its most effective features for risk identification is its enterprise-ready automation for third-party risk measurements."
"The solution helps identify our environment's vulnerabilities."
"SecurityScorecard has impacted my organization positively as it was a surprise to notice that many of our customers follow us there, and the tool scans the web twice per day, so we can see how hackers and what they can see from our publicly available IPs."
"Since we onboarded SecurityScorecard, our organization has been positively impacted by significantly improving our security maturity."
"With its automated approach, nothing is missed on the IPs your organization is related to."
"With SecurityScorecard, the most valuable feature is the ability to identify if third parties or vendors have digital threats that may impact our company. It also scans all internal domains and IPs to find vulnerabilities in the digital landscape. The continuous monitoring capabilities have been beneficial by providing ongoing assessments of potential risks."
 

Cons

"They should improve the solution's test sheets feature for ease of use."
"AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust."
"Some of that flexibility could be enhanced. When comparing Archer and TeamMate+, there is a little more open-ended in terms of certain of our audit processes and procedures. And there is significantly greater freedom in creating ad hoc audit processes and procedures, whereas AuditBoard is a little more limiting in this regard."
"After sending out a request to my network for documents, it would be great to have a receipt that shows who received the request and who did not."
"AuditBoard has the potential for improvement in a few key areas. Firstly, I have experienced instances where the platform has experienced technical issues and ceased to function effectively. Additionally, the editing tools provided within the platform can be slow and laggy, particularly when trying to access and edit important documents. This can be a hindrance to my workflow and efficiency. To address these issues, they should begin by improving the speed and reliability of the platform, as well as enhancing the search engine to make it easier to find specific controls and documents within the platform."
"The initial setup is somewhat difficult because it has multiple pieces that need to be stitched together. You have to integrate it with the business unit you want to test if you want to go down from the corporate level to the operational level."
"A handful of things in the solution need to be improved. One of them is better communication of updates to the system or tool itself."
"The layout for the end user could be improved."
"SecurityScorecard can be improved. As it currently stands, it does a good job monitoring public-facing devices and the internet and DNS."
"The tool needs to have the ability to mitigate vulnerabilities with alternative solutions."
"I realized that because my company was acquired by a bigger organization, SecurityScorecard started associating other portfolio company vulnerabilities to our score, which was not helpful because it was giving us wrong data and giving us vulnerabilities we did not have."
"Some wanted a different solution."
"They could improve the process with a questionnaire module for the product."
"There are areas for improvement in response times and overall support."
"SecurityScorecard could be improved with more detailed remediation guidance, better customization of scoring, and stronger integration with GRC and vendor management tools."
"There could be more information in regards to solving problems like hints on what specifically to look for."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I highly recommend this tool as the price is reasonable. However, consistent pricing is important, and having a loyalty program that rewards long-term customers with lower prices would be a great addition."
"Pricing is variable, like with any technology, and is determined by how hard you wish to negotiate. You can get to a price you're willing to pay if you're willing to negotiate aggressively."
"Even though it's competitive, they offer flexible pricing structures."
"The pricing could be split into a lower-paid tier for smaller organizations and another higher tier for others with a more security-focused outlook. $1000 per month is more than some companies pay for their internet connections in total. UPDATE: they have a new 400$ a month tier for starters."
"The pricing of SecurityScorecard is fair. I would rate it a seven. It's a bit more on the expensive side. In Brazil, for example, making a payment to the vendor involves wire transfers and high taxes, making it more expensive. Selling SecurityScorecard or any American vendor's product in the United States is very different from selling in South America or Brazil."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Vendor Risk Management solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust. For IBM OpenPages, the reporting can be more robust as the summary report on each of the modu...
What is your primary use case for AuditBoard?
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look ...
What advice do you have for others considering AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is recommended for smaller companies, particularly for its risk assessment module, which is simple and easy to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SecurityScorecard?
I have seen a return on investment with SecurityScorecard as it is easy to use and has saved us some time, so we do not need to do the scans on our own.
What needs improvement with SecurityScorecard?
I suggest that SecurityScorecard could be improved by giving a little more specifics on how the scanning works and how you are able to detect those IPs, including more details on the privacy side a...
What is your primary use case for SecurityScorecard?
My main use case for SecurityScorecard is to keep an eye on our vulnerabilities and also monitor which companies follow us in the platform, and we keep track when our score drops so we can fix it. ...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
TriNet, USAA, Zurich, Gilt Groupe, McGraw Hill Financial
Find out what your peers are saying about AuditBoard vs. SecurityScorecard and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.