SAP Risk and Assurance Management
Reviews
Star rating
Rank in Financial Audit
Pros and cons
Pros
- Ease of Use
- Automation
- Reliability
- Integrations
- Easy Integrations
- Efficiency
Cons
- Complexity
- Difficulty
- Not Intuitive
- Time-Consuming
- Steep Learning Curve
- Integration Issues
Traffic & LLM citations
Source: G2 review data
Winning from
Key stats
Adoption by company size
| Segment | Share of reviews |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 22.7% |
| Mid-Market | 38.6% |
| Enterprise | 38.6% |
Quarterly history
| Quarter | Reviews | Star rating |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 Q4 | 14 | 4.5 |
| 2026 Q1 | 6 | 4.4 |
| 2026 Q2 | 21 | 4.3 |
| 2026 Q3 | 1 | 5.0 |
Satisfaction ratings
What reviewers say
Before, strategy was all about unit spreadsheets
“It's built on SAP BTP, and data is exchanged with S/4HANA and our GRC landscape via OData services. The risk and issue records have fields for scores and status. The site supports SAML single sign-on login. We'll pull the register into our BI layer via API call and refresh the sc”
There's still some work to be done on the UI
“There's a lot of green light after a while because of the Control evidence. The monitoring is done on all transactions, not just some of them, which changes the way we work with external audit. We didn't get rid of the walk-throughs, but we did reduce the number of exceptions.”
This tool links each risk to its controls, owners and assessment
“It's built on SAP BTP and talks to our GRC and ERP systems via OData services. Single sign-on is done using SAML through our identity provider. Our comms workspace gets the current status in an API call before we send out any external statements, as there are status fields on the”