IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Risk Ledger · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Risk Ledger

15Judge labels

1First choices

1Negative labels

8 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Risk Ledger was named 6 times in TPRM, where UpGuard led with 53%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business9 of 71

under the label threshold

Mid-market27 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprise23 of 59

under the label threshold

In tprm · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Risk Ledger for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Third-party risk management	Security operations	0%	27 of 72	17%	6	under 10 labels · led by UpGuard at 53%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Risk Ledger yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Risk Ledger across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	1	2	0	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct4 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“the platform is highly economical and dramatically reduces the time your internal team spends chasing down SOC 2 reports” Gemini 3.5 Flash · TPRM · budget prompt · alternative

“Other options to consider are Riskonnect, RiskLedger, IBM OpenPages, and Vanta” Llama 4 Maverick · TPRM · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Complex setup process, clunky onboarding, difficult for non-tech individuals to navigate” GLM 4.7 FlashX · TPRM · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Risk Ledger, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Risk Ledger was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Vanta14 of 150Not in the top three

UpGuard12 of 158Not in the top three

SecurityScorecard9 of 151Not in the top three

Bitsight8 of 150Not in the top three

OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management7 of 151Not in the top three

ProcessUnity7 of 150Not in the top three

Panorays5 of 150Not in the top three

Prevalent5 of 150Not in the top three

Archer4 of 150Not in the top three

Riskonnect3 of 150Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Risk Ledger. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 12 of the 15 answers that named Risk Ledger and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

riskledger.comYour site11

upguard.com11

learn.g2.com7

g2.com5

projectmanagers.net5

securityboulevard.com5

bitsight.com4

ecommercefastlane.com4

riskonnect.com4

vanta.com4

Forty-nine of the sixty domain citations in answers naming Risk Ledger came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

upguard.com/blog/best-third-party-risk-management-software-solutions10

riskledger.com/resources/best-third-party-risk-management-software8

learn.g2.com/best-third-party-risk-management-software7

projectmanagers.net/best-third-party-risk-management-tools-for-small-businesses-top-tprm-p5

ecommercefastlane.com/best-third-party-risk-management-software-20264

g2.com/categories/third-party-supplier-risk-management/small-business4

riskonnect.com/best-third-party-risk-management-software-platforms-in-20264

securityboulevard.com/2024/05/best-11-third-party-risk-management-software-in-20244

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Risk Ledger

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Risk Ledger; a claim can dispute any of them.

RiskLedger 2

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Risk Ledger's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Risk Ledger, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at riskledger.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.