Skip to main content
CMDashCybersecurity Maturity Dashboard
← All landscape areas
Governance, Risk & Compliance · Core

Risk Register & Cyber Risk Quantification

Prices cyber risk in money, not colours.

8 options listedTypical cost: $20k-$300k/yrGOVERN (GV) · IDENTIFY (ID)

A risk register records what could go wrong, who owns it, and what is being done. Cyber risk quantification (CRQ) goes further and expresses that exposure in currency — annualized loss, a loss-exceedance curve, the value of a proposed control — usually via FAIR or a Monte Carlo model over frequency and magnitude. The category has consolidated fast: Safe Security absorbed RiskLens, Axio owns the scenario-stress-test niche, and Kovrr brings insurance catastrophe modelling. The buying question is whether you need defensible board-facing numbers, or whether a well-run qualitative register with real owners is the honest ceiling for your data quality.

Governance decisions and budget arguments both need risk stated in terms a board can act on.

  • Money units let security compete for budget on the same terms as every other function
  • Loss-exceedance curves answer "how much is enough" better than a heat map ever has
  • FAIR decomposition forces explicit assumptions that can be challenged and corrected
  • Directly supports SEC, DORA and NIS2 style materiality and disclosure questions
  • Quantified residual risk makes insurance limits and retentions an evidenced choice
  • Precision theatre: a Monte Carlo run over guessed inputs is still guessed, with more decimal places
  • Calibration and scenario authoring need scarce, expensive expertise
  • Enterprise CRQ platforms are among the priciest line items in the GRC stack
  • Auto-ingested telemetry can bias the model toward whatever your scanners happen to see
  • A quantified register nobody reviews is no better than the qualitative one it replaced

The FAIR standard itself is open and pyfair implements the Monte Carlo maths in Python, so the model is reproducible without a licence. What open source does not give you is the loss-magnitude data, the scenario libraries, the telemetry ingestion, or the board-ready reporting that the commercial platforms are actually sold on.

Safe SecurityCommercial

FAIR-derived CRQ with live telemetry ingestion.

Visit site →
Axio (Axio360)Commercial

Scenario stress-testing plus insurance analysis.

Visit site →
KovrrCommercial

Insurance-grade catastrophe modelling for cyber.

Visit site →
BalbixCommercial

Asset-graph risk model with quantified exposure.

Visit site →
CyberSaintCommercial

CSF-anchored assessment with quantified risk.

Visit site →
RSA ArcherCommercial

Archer Insight quantification on the enterprise IRM suite.

Visit site →
CMDashCommercialThis is CMDash

FAIR-based register with AI-drafted risks from live findings.

Visit site →
pyfairOpen source

Open-source FAIR Monte Carlo model in Python.

Visit site →
CMDash — the product this site sells — is listed as one of the options in this area; that listing exists so you can see the conflict of interest, it is not a claim about how it compares to the alternatives, and the listing itself carries no extra weight in how any option here is presented.
Risk Register & Cyber Risk Quantification — Cybersecurity Landscape Atlas — CMDash