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

ACL Analytics vs ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

ACL Analytics
Ranking in GRC
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Controls Monitoring (1st)
ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier
Ranking in GRC
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the GRC category, the mindshare of ACL Analytics is 2.4%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ACL Analytics2.4%
ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier0.4%
Other97.2%
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2707797 - PeerSpot reviewer
ACL Consultant
Have significantly reduced audit hours through automation and advanced data integration with robust connectors
The key feature of ACL Analytics is integration, which allows for vast amounts of data sources you can connect to. The tool itself allows you to integrate it into your audit work in terms of taking exceptions that you receive from your analytics. It provides integration into your GRC platform and into your audit working files, and then one key thing is the vast amounts of connectors. We have seen a return on investment as we have mostly reduced working hours for the audit engagements. If an auditor was normally budgeted to take 600 hours, we have implemented a solution to take those audit hours down to 200 hours. We are mostly taking those metrics.
Yash Bawane - PeerSpot reviewer
Data engineer at tcs
Enhancing decision-making with automation and integration capabilities
Overall, ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier is powerful, but there are some areas for improvement. A few areas could be better; first, the learning curve is steep for new users, and a guided onboarding or tutorial would help. Second, report customization could be more flexible so different teams can see exactly what they need. Additionally, handling very large data sets can slow down occasionally, so performance optimization would be helpful. Finally, adding more predictive analytics or AI-driven insights could automatically highlight unusual risks or trends without manual analysis. We mostly work on data, so we face many challenges with large data sets when using ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier. When you feed very large data sets into RQ, such as hundreds of applications and thousands of vulnerabilities, the performance can sometimes slow down during scoring or dashboard updates. It doesn't break, but processing can take longer than expected. This is mostly unnoticeable during bulk imports or complex scenario analysis, so planning updates during off-peak hours or breaking data into smaller batches can help. Overall, it's reliable, but performance could be improved for very large-scale data and environments. It would be great to have more interactive dashboards that let users drill down easily without leaving the main view. Another useful addition could be automated alerts or notifications when risk scores change significantly, so the team doesn't have to check a dashboard constantly. Lastly, more built-in guidance or AI tips for interpreting FAIR-based metrics could help new users to get up to speed faster. Overall, the tool is strong, but these additions would make it even more efficient and user-friendly.

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 of ACL Analytics is its powerful data control capabilities."
"It improved my organization using ​an automated audit revision with scripts."
"I recommend ACL Analytics because it makes work easier and is user-friendly."
"We have seen a return on investment as we have mostly reduced working hours for the audit engagements."
"It is very flexible and has hundreds of functions."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to import files from other software packages. Its reporting and visualization capabilities have made our reporting easier. Importing results into spreadsheets or other documents for incorporation into reports is particularly helpful."
"I did not have any problems with the stability of ACL Analytics."
"I like the fact that in the duplicate section, I can find matches, and I can find situations where certain cells or certain cell points match, but there's a difference as well between two different records."
"With ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier, our team can respond much faster because risks are quantified and prioritized automatically, so we know what to tackle first."
"ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier has positively impacted both our organization and our customers' organizations by improving how we prioritize and manage risk scores across multiple clients."
"ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier has positively impacted both our organization and our customers' organizations by improving how we prioritize and manage risk scores across multiple clients."
"ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier definitely saves our time and money, for example, manual risk reporting time dropped by around 60% to 70% since the dashboard and automated scoring handle most calculations."
 

Cons

"A person must have someone teach them how to use ACL Analytics as a common person cannot use it independently."
"The ease of use could be better."
"The product's pricing has increased over the years."
"It would be beneficial if the software could improve its capabilities when extracting data from databases, particularly for those who may not be familiar with SQL queries."
"The visualization capabilities in ACL Analytics need more variety and features."
"Currently, the platform is not very comfortable for users coming from a non-technical or non-coding background."
"The tool's pricing is quite high. When I purchased the software, I constantly contacted the representatives. I requested a single license, but they informed me that only packages of three licenses were available. This made it very difficult for us to manage the cost, especially given the economic challenges in our country."
"I believe the formulas and scripting language in ACL Analytics need development to be easier for me to use."
"When you feed very large data sets into RQ, such as hundreds of applications and thousands of vulnerabilities, the performance can sometimes slow down during scoring or dashboard updates."
"The user interface for multiple clients and large-scale deployment should be improved because we have observed sluggishness when navigating between clients and assets, and it takes time to resolve."
"When you feed very large data sets into RQ, such as hundreds of applications and thousands of vulnerabilities, the performance can sometimes slow down during scoring or dashboard updates."
"The user interface for multiple clients and large-scale deployment should be improved because we have observed sluggishness when navigating between clients and assets, and it takes time to resolve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of $5,000 is high, and transferring money from one country to another, particularly in dollars, is challenging due to high exchange rates. Although we managed to purchase it then, the lack of a single license option and the high cost were issues."
"The pricing for me as an individual seems a lot. For our organization, the price is okay. It's about $6,000 a year. I don't know of any additional costs."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Insurance Company
8%
Media Company
59%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ACL Analytics?
The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to import files from other software packages. Its reporting and visualization capabilities have made our reporting easier. Importing results into spr...
What needs improvement with ACL Analytics?
We have an issue with the hard coding of passwords in ACL Analytics. You do not have an interface where you can enter a password and then it can be encrypted when you enter it. Every time you enter...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier is overall good because the pricing is reasonable for the value it provides. Though it's not the cheapest opt...
What needs improvement with ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier?
ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier can be improved by making the scenario modeling and reporting more interactive and customizable, allowing analysts to quickly adjust parameters and visualize what-if o...
What is your primary use case for ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier?
ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier serves as my main tool in my current organization. In my current organization, we use ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier to prioritize vulnerabilities and threats across mu...
 

Also Known As

ACL
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essar Group, Dean Foods, Lafarge North America, Austrian Ministry of Finance
Customer Case Studies and Use Cases
Find out what your peers are saying about ACL Analytics vs. ThreatConnect Risk Quantifier and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.