Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) vs MEGA HOPEX comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Diligent One Platform (form...
Ranking in GRC
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
IT Governance (5th), IT Vendor Risk Management (16th)
MEGA HOPEX
Ranking in GRC
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (4th), Business Process Design (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the GRC category, the mindshare of Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) is 3.7%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 1.5%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

WW
Jan 27, 2023
Good automation and analytics, but is costly
The report model was our main concern. I believe currently the solution uses a third party for the reporting. As part of a consulting firm, one of the challenges we face is the difficulty in producing reports that meet the expectations of our clients and customers. It would be beneficial if the focus could be shifted toward improving the reporting aspect. The impact report is a crucial aspect, as we only have one opportunity to create it. Galvanize HighBond can improve by generating more impact reports post-project, and allowing access to the reports using a web version, which would greatly benefit us. The cost of the solution is expensive and needs improvement.
Navi Thejesh - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 1, 2024
Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity
The latest version is HOPEX WiFi. HOPEX can be on the cloud and accessed from anywhere within the given access network area. It is very interactive. We can do things from anywhere, and all the applications will work as specified. We can generate documents and can publish the documents. We can create a data match and visualize graphs and everything. Everything can be generated from the web interface itself. It has good functionality. We can develop our own customizations and meta models to define requirements, in-house business functions, and requirements. MEGA is already defined by global standards. A company can adapt to global standards and work in such a way to design its own methodology to define its structure. The interface is very good.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is automation."
"The platform is stable."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"MEGA HOPEX helps me to see the benefits of different solutions in terms of the entire ecosystem I have, by providing different integrations and overseeing the entire system."
"Its availability is very good."
"The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations."
"The most valuable feature of MEGA HOPEX is the publication method for static websites. You can generate the whole database into a static website. Additionally, in the new tabular entry, you don't have to put objects or links, you can go and fill a tab and the MEGA HOPEX will generate an object for you in a simple way."
"I find the process modeling and value chain features valuable. The application portfolio management functionality and workflow management capabilities are also nice. It provides a holistic view for stakeholders and helps align IT with business strategies. It facilitates collaboration across the organization and covers all domains, including business, applications, technology, and data."
 

Cons

"The cost of the solution is expensive and needs improvement."
"Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc."
"Scalability can be a problem sometimes."
"The product must improve integration with other tools."
"We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office."
"I would like to see more regular updates released."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
"I cannot recall coming across any missing features."
"An area for improvement in MEGA HOPEX is its vast learning curve. The tool is also heavy, so that's a pain point. MEGA HOPEX is also tricky to use if you don't train for many hours."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I give the cost of the solution a six out of ten."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
"I've been told that MEGA HOPEX is very expensive, which is why small organizations dismiss the tool. It's complex and costly versus other simpler and cheaper solutions."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
"The product has a high cost."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"The price of the support depends on the vendors that are reselling this module or the MEGA HOPEX version 5. We are on premium support and are their only partners in the GCC, we have a premium support contract with them. The support we have is not with the client. The client does not bear the cost, it's us who bear the cost."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
46%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
Educational Organization
42%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Galvanize HighBond?
Regarding pricing, we are located in Africa where economic instability prevails and our currency continues to lose value due to inflation. The cost of the solution is high. I give the cost of the s...
What needs improvement with Galvanize HighBond?
The report model was our main concern. I believe currently the solution uses a third party for the reporting. As part of a consulting firm, one of the challenges we face is the difficulty in produc...
Any experience with Strategic Project Portfolio Management Solutions?
Hi @Cheryl Joseph ​Looking at the crossover between Project and Portfolio management with EA, then Planview could be a good choice. If looking at Portfolio Management from an EA perspective then Le...
 

Also Known As

Rsam GRC, HighBond, HighBond by Galvanize , Diligent GRC Platform
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CNA Insurance
Aetna, Fannie Mae, M&T Bank, Glatfelter Insurance Group, Zions Management Services Company, The College Board, Baxter Credit Union, AXA Financial, Missouri Department of Conservation, New York State OTDA, MEG Energy Corp, Walgreens, Procter & Gamble, Biogen Idec, Gilead Sciences, Organic Valley, Trinity Health, Nissan and Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) vs. MEGA HOPEX and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.