Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

LogicManager vs Riskonnect

LogicManager logo

LogicManager

Cybersecurity

Enterprise risk management priced as a flat fee with unlimited users

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Riskonnect logo

Riskonnect

Insurance

Integrated risk management and claims administration for corporate risk teams

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: LogicManager the flat fee is quoted per organisation and not published, so the pricing model that makes LogicManager attractive still cannot be compared without a sales process.; Riskonnect total first year cost is dominated by implementation rather than licence; vendor professional services frequently approach the annual licence figure and the internal staff time to define data structures and migrate historic claims is a comparable third cost that never appears in the quote.
  • They diverge on capability: LogicManager covers Risk taxonomy, Riskonnect covers Claims administration.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which LogicManager and Riskonnect actually diverge.

Attributes where LogicManager and Riskonnect differ
AttributeLogicManagerRiskonnect
PlatformsWebWeb, iOS, Android
CategoryCybersecurityInsurance

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in LogicManager

  • Risk taxonomy
  • Unlimited users
  • Risk assessments
  • Third-party risk
  • Internal audit
  • Policy management
  • Incident management
  • Advisory support

Only in Riskonnect

  • Claims administration
  • Total cost of risk reporting
  • Policy and exposure management
  • Enterprise risk management
  • Health and safety
  • Business continuity
  • Third party risk
  • Data integration

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

LogicManager

  • A mid-sized bank or credit union that needs every department head contributing to risk assessment without paying for a seat eachnot Riskonnect
  • A risk team replacing a spreadsheet register that cannot show which controls a given vendor failure would affectnot Riskonnect
  • An organisation preparing for a regulatory examination that must evidence a linked risk, control and issue trailnot Riskonnect
  • A company consolidating separate vendor risk, policy and audit tools onto one taxonomy so findings are not duplicatednot Riskonnect

Riskonnect

  • A self insured employer that wants to own its workers compensation loss data rather than depend on the broker or TPA system it will lose at renewalnot LogicManager
  • A risk manager building a defensible total cost of risk figure for the CFO across claims, premium, retained losses and collateralnot LogicManager
  • A third party administrator running claims for multiple clients that needs separate entity structures on one platformnot LogicManager
  • A multinational consolidating claims, safety incidents and enterprise risk registers onto one entity hierarchy for board reportingnot LogicManager

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

LogicManager

  • The flat fee is quoted per organisation and not published, so the pricing model that makes LogicManager attractive still cannot be compared without a sales process.
  • Configuration depth means the taxonomy has to be designed properly before rollout, and organisations that skip that step end up with a structure that cannot answer the linkage questions the tool exists to answer.
  • Reporting and dashboarding are functional rather than flexible, and teams wanting bespoke board reporting commonly export to Power BI, which reintroduces the manual step they were removing.
  • Quantitative risk modelling is limited compared with specialist tools, so organisations needing Monte Carlo style loss simulation will need something else alongside it.
  • The user interface is dated relative to newer compliance automation tools, and infrequent business users often need repeat training, which erodes the participation benefit that unlimited licensing is supposed to deliver.

Riskonnect

  • Total first year cost is dominated by implementation rather than licence; vendor professional services frequently approach the annual licence figure and the internal staff time to define data structures and migrate historic claims is a comparable third cost that never appears in the quote.
  • The platform grew through acquisitions including Ventiv and Sword GRC, so module interfaces and administration models are not uniform and staff trained on one module do not transfer cleanly to another.
  • Licensing is modular, so the price quoted for a claims deployment rises materially the first time the risk team wants ERM or business continuity, and there is little negotiating leverage once the claims data is migrated.
  • Configuration depth means most changes go through an administrator or the vendor rather than an end user, and risk teams without a dedicated system administrator find that change requests queue for weeks.
  • Historic claims data migration quality depends entirely on what the outgoing broker or TPA will export, and incomplete legacy data undermines the multi year trend reporting that was the reason for buying.

Pricing, plan by plan

LogicManager

On request
  • LogicManager Platform$undefined/year
    • Fixed annual fee, unlimited users
    • Risk, audit, vendor, policy and incident modules
    • Advisory analyst support included

Riskonnect

On request
  • Riskonnect Platform$undefined/year
    • Licensed by module, named user count and entity structure
    • Claims administration and RMIS core
    • Optional ERM, safety, continuity and third party risk modules

Which should you pick?

Choose LogicManager if

  • You need risk taxonomy.
  • You also want unlimited users.
LogicManager review

Choose Riskonnect if

  • You need claims administration.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want total cost of risk reporting.
Riskonnect review

Questions people ask

Is LogicManager or Riskonnect better?
Neither clearly leads. LogicManager starts at On request and Riskonnect at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, LogicManager or Riskonnect?
LogicManager starts at On request and Riskonnect at On request.
Does LogicManager or Riskonnect run on more platforms?
LogicManager runs on Web. Riskonnect runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is LogicManager best used for?
LogicManager is most often used for a mid-sized bank or credit union that needs every department head contributing to risk assessment without paying for a seat each, a risk team replacing a spreadsheet register that cannot show which controls a given vendor failure would affect, an organisation preparing for a regulatory examination that must evidence a linked risk, control and issue trail, a company consolidating separate vendor risk, policy and audit tools onto one taxonomy so findings are not duplicated. Of those, a mid-sized bank or credit union that needs every department head contributing to risk assessment without paying for a seat each and a risk team replacing a spreadsheet register that cannot show which controls a given vendor failure would affect are not what Riskonnect is typically brought in for.
What can LogicManager do that Riskonnect cannot?
LogicManager covers Risk taxonomy, Unlimited users, Risk assessments, Third-party risk. Riskonnect covers Claims administration, Total cost of risk reporting, Policy and exposure management, Enterprise risk management.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

LogicManager: Is LogicManager really unlimited users?

Yes. It licences on a fixed annual fee covering the organisation rather than per seat, which is the main reason mid-market buyers pick it.

Riskonnect: What does Riskonnect actually cost?

Nothing is published. Reported deals range from roughly 35,000 US dollars a year for a narrow deployment to well over 250,000 for a multi module enterprise programme, with implementation services quoted separately and often of similar magnitude in year one.

LogicManager: What does it cost?

Not published. Mid-market ERM platforms of this class typically sit in the low tens of thousands of dollars a year, quoted by scope.

Riskonnect: How long does implementation take?

Three to six months is typical for a claims and RMIS deployment, longer where historic loss data from several brokers or TPAs has to be normalised.

LogicManager: Is it a compliance automation tool like Drata?

No. It is enterprise risk management with audit and vendor risk, not continuous control monitoring for SOC 2 evidence collection.

Riskonnect: Why not just use the broker supplied RMIS?

Because you lose it when you change broker, and the data model serves the broker reporting rather than yours. Owning the system is the main reason companies pay for one.

LogicManager: How long does implementation take?

Weeks to a few months, far shorter than the enterprise GRC suites, provided the risk taxonomy is agreed up front.

Riskonnect: Is it a GRC platform or a claims system?

Both, but the claims and insurable risk core is the mature part. If you want pure GRC without claims, you are buying more platform than you need.

Share

Related pages

More on LogicManager

More on Riskonnect

Keep looking

Other head to heads