Top 10 Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) Tools: Features, Pros, Cons and Comparison

Introduction

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) is the practice of identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks that come from using third parties such as vendors, suppliers, contractors, and service providers. A strong TPRM program helps you maintain a complete vendor inventory, classify vendors by criticality, run consistent assessments, track remediation to closure, and prove ongoing oversight for audits and customer security reviews.

Common use cases include: onboarding a new SaaS vendor with security due diligence, running scheduled reassessments for critical vendors, collecting evidence and exceptions for auditors, tracking remediation tasks across IT and vendors, monitoring vendor cyber posture changes, and reporting portfolio risk to leadership.

What buyers should evaluate:

• Vendor inventory and tiering (criticality, data access, business impact)
• Assessment workflows (questionnaires, evidence, review gates)
• Remediation management (owners, SLAs, proof of closure)
• Continuous monitoring (alerts, external signals, change tracking)
• Risk scoring (inherent vs residual, configurable scoring models)
• Workflow automation (intake, approvals, renewals, exceptions)
• Integrations (SSO, ticketing, GRC, CMDB, IAM)
• Reporting (portfolio risk, overdue items, audit-ready outputs)
• Security controls (RBAC, audit logs, encryption, retention)
• Vendor collaboration (portals, messaging, evidence exchange)

Best for: security, risk, compliance, legal ops, procurement, and IT teams that need to scale vendor oversight and maintain audit readiness.

Not ideal for: very small teams with a low vendor count, or teams that only need a one-time questionnaire without remediation, monitoring, and reporting.

---

Key trends in TPRM tools

• Continuous monitoring is increasingly used alongside point-in-time assessments for critical vendors.
• More vendor collaboration features to reduce email threads and improve evidence turnaround.
• Risk-based tiering becomes stricter, with lighter workflows for low-risk vendors and deeper workflows for critical vendors.
• Remediation moves from “findings lists” to tracked work with accountability and closure evidence.
• More standardization of control sets and reusable answer libraries to reduce fatigue.
• Better handling of fourth-party and supply-chain dependency questions in critical vendor reviews.
• “Cyber ratings plus workflow” patterns become common, where monitoring signals support prioritization but do not replace evidence review.
• Increased focus on reporting that leadership trusts: trends, overdue remediation, and risk concentration by business unit.

---

How we selected these tools

• Included tools commonly used for third-party risk workflows such as vendor inventory, assessments, remediation, and reporting.
• Balanced platform-style TPRM solutions with cyber monitoring tools that support third-party cyber posture visibility.
• Prioritized scalability across many vendors and multiple stakeholders with clear ownership and workflow controls.
• Considered integration needs with ticketing, identity, and governance processes.
• Avoided guessing pricing, certifications, or public ratings when not clearly stated.

---

Top 10 Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) Tools

1.OneTrust

OneTrust is often used to build structured third-party oversight programs with standardized workflows that scale across business units.

Key features

• Vendor inventory and lifecycle workflows (Varies)
• Tiering and risk-based routing (Varies)
• Questionnaires and evidence collection (Varies)
• Remediation tracking and follow-ups (Varies)
• Reporting and dashboards (Varies)
• Workflow automation for intake and reassessments (Varies)

Pros

• Strong for teams that want repeatable workflows across many vendors
• Useful when multiple departments collaborate on vendor reviews

Cons

• Governance is required to keep vendor records and evidence clean
• Feature depth depends on configuration and modules

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Designed to fit into enterprise workflows where identity, ticketing, and governance systems already exist.

• SSO and identity (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• GRC connections (Varies)
• APIs and automation (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

2.Archer

Archer is commonly selected for structured, configurable third-party risk programs where questionnaires, documentation, and remediation are governed consistently.

Key features

• Questionnaire-based assessments (Varies)
• Evidence collection and review workflows (Varies)
• Residual risk tracking concepts (Varies)
• Exception handling (Varies)
• Remediation plans with ownership (Varies)
• Roll-up reporting across vendors and categories (Varies)

Pros

• Strong fit for formal governance and configurable workflows
• Useful for organizations that require consistent remediation accountability

Cons

• Implementations can become heavy without a disciplined operating model
• Over-customization can reduce usability

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud / Hybrid (Varies)

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Commonly evaluated for enterprise workflow fit and reporting.

• SSO and identity (Varies)
• Ticketing integrations (Varies)
• GRC data sources (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

3.ServiceNow Vendor Risk Management

ServiceNow Vendor Risk Management is commonly used when teams want vendor risk embedded into operational workflows and ongoing oversight.

Key features

• Central vendor risk workflows (Varies)
• Assessment and evidence tracking patterns (Varies)
• Remediation workflow tracking (Varies)
• Portfolio risk reporting concepts (Varies)
• Continuous monitoring emphasis for critical vendors (Varies)
• Automation and routing patterns (Varies)

Pros

• Strong for workflow-driven remediation and accountability
• Useful when vendor risk must align with broader operational processes

Cons

• Needs clear risk models so workflows do not become “busywork”
• Results depend on configuration and governance

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Often used where workflow and operations tooling must connect smoothly across teams.

• SSO and identity (Varies)
• Ticketing and workflow (Varies)
• CMDB/asset context (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

4.MetricStream

MetricStream is often evaluated when vendor risk must be managed alongside broader governance, risk, and compliance operations.

Key features

• Vendor inventory and segmentation (Varies)
• Assessments and control mapping concepts (Varies)
• Issue and remediation tracking (Varies)
• Workflow automation and approvals (Varies)
• Risk scoring models (Varies)
• Reporting dashboards (Varies)

Pros

• Strong when TPRM must align with enterprise risk and compliance workflows
• Useful for cross-functional governance models

Cons

• Usability depends heavily on implementation quality
• Requires disciplined data ownership for reporting accuracy

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud (Varies)

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Commonly evaluated for governance stack integration.

• SSO (Varies)
• GRC integrations (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow integrations (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

5.Prevalent

Prevalent is often used to scale vendor assessments, evidence collection, and follow-ups with repeatable workflows.

Key features

• Vendor assessments and questionnaire workflows (Varies)
• Evidence handling and review patterns (Varies)
• Tiering and risk scoring concepts (Varies)
• Remediation follow-ups (Varies)
• Monitoring signals and alerts (Varies)
• Reporting for portfolio visibility (Varies)

Pros

• Practical for increasing assessment throughput
• Helps standardize repeatable vendor review workflows

Cons

• Requires consistent governance to keep assessments current
• Monitoring depth depends on configuration

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Evaluated for workflow connectivity and reporting outputs.

• SSO (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)
• Vendor collaboration workflows (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

6.ProcessUnity

ProcessUnity is commonly used for structured vendor lifecycle workflows with clear ownership and measurable remediation cycles.

Key features

• Vendor inventory and tiering workflows (Varies)
• Reusable assessment templates (Varies)
• Remediation tracking and accountability (Varies)
• Exception handling patterns (Varies)
• Workflow automation for routing and approvals (Varies)
• Reporting dashboards for risk posture and overdue actions (Varies)

Pros

• Good fit for teams that need repeatable processes and accountability
• Useful for moving beyond spreadsheets into governed workflows

Cons

• Needs well-defined internal scoring policies to avoid inconsistency
• Integration depth varies by environment

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Evaluated for identity and workflow fit.

• SSO (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow integrations (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)
• Vendor portals (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

7.UpGuard Vendor Risk

UpGuard Vendor Risk is often selected when teams want vendor security posture visibility as a major input into third-party oversight.

Key features

• Vendor security posture monitoring (Varies)
• Vendor tracking and portfolio organization (Varies)
• Risk categorization and prioritization concepts (Varies)
• Trend visibility over time (Varies)
• Reporting for vendor comparisons (Varies)
• Workflow support for follow-up actions (Varies)

Pros

• Strong for prioritizing vendors using observable external signals
• Useful for ongoing monitoring alongside internal assessments

Cons

• Outside-in monitoring should be paired with evidence and governance workflows
• Coverage depends on vendor footprint and monitoring approach

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Often evaluated for how monitoring signals feed remediation.

• SSO (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)
• Vendor collaboration options (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

8.Whistic

Whistic is commonly used for vendor questionnaires and evidence exchange to reduce friction in vendor security reviews.

Key features

• Questionnaire workflows (Varies)
• Evidence collection and organization (Varies)
• Vendor communication and tracking (Varies)
• Review and approval patterns (Varies)
• Follow-up tracking for outstanding items (Varies)
• Reporting for assessment status (Varies)

Pros

• Useful for scaling questionnaire-based vendor reviews
• Helps reduce repeated back-and-forth for evidence requests

Cons

• Full TPRM often requires broader lifecycle workflows and remediation governance
• Outcomes depend on internal policy and consistent program usage

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Evaluated for workflow connectivity and exports.

• SSO (Varies)
• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Export options (Varies)
• Vendor collaboration workflows (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

9.SecurityScorecard

SecurityScorecard is commonly used for continuous third-party cyber risk visibility and monitoring signals.

Key features

• Continuous monitoring signals (Varies)
• Portfolio visibility across vendors (Varies)
• Prioritization concepts for critical issues (Varies)
• Remediation collaboration concepts (Varies)
• Reporting for supply chain cyber oversight (Varies)
• Workflow integrations to route issues (Varies)

Pros

• Strong for continuous cyber posture visibility across many vendors
• Useful for triage and prioritization in large vendor portfolios

Cons

• Monitoring does not replace evidence collection and contractual control requirements
• Requires clear thresholds and response playbooks to avoid alert fatigue

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Evaluated for how monitoring signals become actionable work.

• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• GRC integrations (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)
• Vendor collaboration options (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

10.BitSight

BitSight is commonly used for security ratings and third-party cyber monitoring to support vendor risk oversight.

Key features

• Security ratings for vendor monitoring (Varies)
• Portfolio views to prioritize actions (Varies)
• Monitoring signals and trend concepts (Varies)
• Reporting for vendor cyber posture oversight (Varies)
• Vendor engagement concepts (Varies)
• Workflow integration patterns (Varies)

Pros

• Helpful for consistent cyber posture signals across many vendors
• Useful for portfolio-level prioritization

Cons

• Ratings are most effective when paired with business context and evidence review
• Not a full replacement for remediation workflows and exception management

Platforms / Deployment

• Web
• Cloud

Security & Compliance
Not publicly stated.

Integrations & Ecosystem
Evaluated for how ratings and findings flow into remediation and reporting.

• Ticketing/workflow tools (Varies)
• GRC systems (Varies)
• APIs (Varies)
• Reporting exports (Varies)
• Vendor collaboration workflows (Varies)

Support & Community
Varies / Not publicly stated.

---

Comparison table

Tool Name	Best For	Platform(s) Supported	Deployment (Cloud/Self-hosted/Hybrid)	Standout Feature	Public Rating
OneTrust	Scalable vendor lifecycle workflows	Web	Cloud	Workflow-driven TPRM program operations	N/A
Archer	Configurable, governance-heavy vendor risk	Web	Cloud / Hybrid (Varies)	Structured assessments with remediation accountability	N/A
ServiceNow Vendor Risk Management	Vendor risk embedded in operational workflows	Web	Cloud	Workflow alignment with remediation tracking	N/A
MetricStream	TPRM tied to broader governance operations	Web	Cloud (Varies)	Enterprise governance alignment	N/A
Prevalent	Scaling assessments and follow-ups	Web	Cloud	Repeatable vendor assessment workflows	N/A
ProcessUnity	Repeatable lifecycle workflows with accountability	Web	Cloud	Standardized tiering and remediation tracking	N/A
UpGuard Vendor Risk	Vendor cyber posture visibility	Web	Cloud	Monitoring-driven vendor prioritization	N/A
Whistic	Vendor questionnaires and evidence exchange	Web	Cloud	Reduced friction in security reviews	N/A
SecurityScorecard	Continuous third-party cyber monitoring	Web	Cloud	Ongoing visibility into vendor cyber posture	N/A
BitSight	Ratings-driven third-party monitoring	Web	Cloud	Portfolio-level cyber posture signals	N/A

---

Evaluation and scoring

Weights used:

• Core features – 25%
• Ease of use – 15%
• Integrations & ecosystem – 15%
• Security & compliance – 10%
• Performance & reliability – 10%
• Support & community – 10%
• Price / value – 15%

Tool Name	Core (25%)	Ease (15%)	Integrations (15%)	Security (10%)	Performance (10%)	Support (10%)	Value (15%)	Weighted Total (0–10)
OneTrust	8	7	8	7	8	7	6	7.25
Archer	8	6	7	7	8	7	6	6.95
ServiceNow Vendor Risk Management	8	7	9	7	8	7	6	7.40
MetricStream	8	6	8	7	8	7	6	7.05
Prevalent	7	7	7	6	7	7	7	6.95
ProcessUnity	7	7	7	6	7	7	7	6.95
UpGuard Vendor Risk	7	8	7	6	8	7	7	7.15
Whistic	6	8	6	6	7	7	8	6.95
SecurityScorecard	7	7	7	6	8	7	6	7.00
BitSight	7	7	7	6	8	7	6	7.00

How to interpret the scores:
These scores are comparative and intended for shortlisting. A tool can score lower overall and still be the best fit if it specializes in your bottleneck (questionnaires, monitoring, or workflow). Treat security verification as a procurement step rather than a scoring shortcut. Use a pilot to validate tiering, assessments, evidence handling, remediation workflows, integrations, and reporting accuracy.

---

Which TPRM tool is right for you?

Solo / Freelancer

If you have a small vendor list, start with a simple inventory, a tiering rule, and a basic remediation tracker. Adopt a dedicated tool only when customer security reviews and audit pressure become frequent.

SMB

---

Prioritize reusable questionnaires, simple workflows, and fast vendor collaboration. If you have a handful of critical vendors, add monitoring signals to avoid surprises while keeping the workflow lightweight.

Mid-market

Prioritize tiering, governance, and automation to reduce manual chasing. Ensure ticketing integration is clean so remediation becomes real work with owners and deadlines.

Enterprise

Prioritize scalability, role-based workflows, audit trails, and integration into existing governance operations. Many enterprises use a workflow-centric platform plus a monitoring tool for continuous cyber signals.

Budget vs Premium

If budget is tight, target your biggest leak: assessment throughput, evidence management, or remediation closure. Premium platforms are most valuable when vendor count is high and stakeholders are many.

Feature depth vs Ease of use

If adoption is the main risk, choose the tool business owners and SMEs will actually use. If governance is the main risk, choose stronger workflow controls and invest in operating discipline.

Integrations & Scalability

List must-have systems first: SSO, ticketing, procurement, and reporting. Validate that vendor metadata, evidence, and remediation tasks flow end-to-end without manual copy-paste.

Security & Compliance Needs

Verify RBAC depth, audit logs, retention controls, and how vendor evidence is shared. Treat evidence quality and remediation closure as non-negotiables for audit readiness.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

1) What does TPRM cover?
TPRM covers vendor inventory, tiering, assessments, evidence handling, remediation, and ongoing oversight across the vendor lifecycle.

2) How do I tier vendors correctly?
Tier by data sensitivity, system access, business criticality, and substitution difficulty. Use tiers to drive different assessment depth and monitoring intensity.

3) Do I need continuous monitoring?
It is most valuable for critical vendors and high-change vendors. Use it to catch changes early, then route issues into remediation workflows.

4) Are cyber ratings enough to approve a vendor?
No. Ratings are useful signals for triage and prioritization, but they should be combined with evidence review, contract controls, and business context.

5) How do I reduce questionnaire fatigue?
Use tiering, reuse libraries, and only ask what you need. Keep evidence requests precise and align questions to your control set.

6) What makes remediation actually work?
Clear ownership, due dates, escalation rules, and required proof of closure. Avoid “open indefinitely” findings without accountability.

7) What are common program mistakes?
Treating every vendor as high risk, collecting evidence without review, and failing to track remediation to closure. Another mistake is not enforcing reassessment cadence.

8) How should I run a pilot?
Pilot with a small set of vendors across tiers and run intake, assessment, evidence review, remediation, and reporting. Measure cycle time and completion rates.

9) What reports should leadership see?
Portfolio risk by tier, overdue remediation, risk concentration by business unit, and trend lines for critical vendors. Keep it consistent and defensible.

10) Who should own TPRM?
Security and risk typically own the framework, but business owners must be accountable for vendor selection and remediation closure. A cross-functional operating model works best.

---

Conclusion

Third-party risk becomes manageable when you standardize tiering, run repeatable assessments, and enforce remediation ownership instead of relying on one-time checklists. Choose a workflow-centric platform if your bottleneck is inventory, approvals, evidence handling, and audit readiness, and add monitoring tools if your bottleneck is continuous cyber visibility across critical vendors. Shortlist two or three tools, pilot with real vendors across tiers, and validate SSO and ticketing integrations early. Then lock your scoring model, reassessment cadence, and escalation rules so risk stays visible, measurable, and actionable.