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

IBM OpenPages vs SAS Enterprise GRC comparison

IBM and SAS are both solutions in the GRC category. IBM is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.7, while SAS is ranked #22. IBM holds a 5.9% mindshare in G, compared to SAS’s 1.6% mindshare. Additionally, 60% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SAS users who would recommend it.
IBM OpenPages
Read 7 IBM OpenPages reviews
  • 1,122 Views
  • 755 Comparison Views
60% willing to recommend
SAS Enterprise GRC
Read 1 SAS Enterprise GRC review
  • 320 Views
  • 231 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between IBM OpenPages and SAS Enterprise GRC based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, OneTrust, AuditBoard and others in GRC.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed GRC Report (Updated: January 2025).
Buyer's Guide
GRC
January 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 832,138 peers since 2012

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

IBM OpenPages
Ranking in GRC
7th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
IT Governance (2nd)
SAS Enterprise GRC
Ranking in GRC
22nd
Average Rating
10.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the GRC category, the mindshare of IBM OpenPages is 5.9%, up from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAS Enterprise GRC is 1.6%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

Seetha Pullela - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced risk management with useful reports and easy to deploy
We have deployed the ORM module in our bank. We have our businesses listed in the application, and we identify risks. We manage multiple controls, assess historical controls, and monitor these controls using test source control monitoring and management. We have recently started using the Assurant…
Read full review
it_user77958 - PeerSpot reviewer
We've improved our data management & human resource skills. Needs to work more on its presentation layer for users.
Follow the suggested implementation approach and it will be a smooth sailing. The core issue in any business analytics and business intelligence solutions is always data quality, deployment architecture and skilled human resource. Ensure that you have deliberated on these in detail and there will be no issues or hiccups during implementation
Read full review
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Insurance Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM OpenPages?
The product’s interface is very intuitive.
See all answers
What needs improvement with IBM OpenPages?
It would be useful to have more out-of-the-box functionality, especially triggers and calculations. Additionally, more detailed documentation and video-oriented resources would be beneficial.
See all answers
What is your primary use case for IBM OpenPages?
We have deployed the ORM module in our bank. We have our businesses listed in the application, and we identify risks. We manage multiple controls, assess historical controls, and monitor these cont...
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

RSA Archer vs IBM OpenPages Logo
RSA Archer vs IBM OpenPages
Compared 49% of the time
MetricStream vs IBM OpenPages Logo
MetricStream vs IBM OpenPages
Compared 28% of the time
SAP BusinessObjects GRC vs IBM OpenPages Logo
SAP BusinessObjects GRC vs IBM OpenPages
Compared 8% of the time
OneTrust GRC vs IBM OpenPages Logo
OneTrust GRC vs IBM OpenPages
Compared 7% of the time
More IBM OpenPages Competitors
RSA Archer vs SAS Enterprise GRC Logo
RSA Archer vs SAS Enterprise GRC
Compared 56% of the time
More SAS Enterprise GRC Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
GRC
January 2025
IBM OpenPages reportDownload IBM OpenPages product report
Buyer's Guide
GRC
January 2025
SAS Enterprise GRC reportDownload SAS Enterprise GRC product report
 

Also Known As

OpenPages
No data available
 

Overview

Enables customers to manage risk and compliance initiatives across the enterprise, helping businesses to reduce loss, improve decision-making about resource allocation, and optimize business performance.
IBM
With SAS Enterprise GRC, you can standardize and manage strategic and operational risks, and consolidate information from all financial risk management systems (credit risk, market risk, etc.) into an enterprisewide view of risk.
SAS
 

Sample Customers

Nationwide, Process Innovation AG, OSRAM Licht AG, Dep‹sito Central de Valores (DCV), Delta Lloyd Group, Unum
Belgium Special Tax, New Zealand Ministry of Health, New Zealand Ministry of Social Development North Carolina Marine Fisheries, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Town of Cary Western Australia Police
Buyer's Guide
GRC
January 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, OneTrust, AuditBoard and others in GRC. Updated: January 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our list of best GRC vendors.

We monitor all GRC reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.