Resolver vs Riskonnect
Updated July 30, 2026 · How we score
Resolver (risk intelligence and incident management) and Riskonnect (integrated risk with BCM via Castellan) both compete in risk management software. Overall, Resolver scores higher in our evaluation (7.4 vs 7.3), while Riskonnect is the stronger regional fit for GCC organisations. The right choice depends on your context — the table below shows exactly where they differ.
Resolver
3.7
Best for: Organisations where incidents, investigations and security events drive the risk programme.
Side-by-side comparison
| Attribute | Resolver | Riskonnect |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 7.4 | 7.3 |
| Functionality | 8.2 | 8.3 |
| Ease of use | 7.9 | 7.3 |
| Value | 7.4 | 7.2 |
| Support | 7.8 | 7.7 |
| GCC fit | 5.6 | 6.1 |
| HQ | Toronto, Canada | Atlanta, USA |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Pricing model | Module subscription; quote-based | Module subscription; quote-based |
| Free trial | No | No |
| Data residency | US/EU/Canada hosting | US/EU hosting |
| Arabic support | No | No |
| Regional presence | Some regional clients via EMEA; Kroll offices in Dubai and Riyadh | EMEA coverage; Camms acquisition adds Dubai office |
| Framework content | ISO 31000, ISO 27001, Corporate security standards | ISO 22301, ISO 31000, Insurance/claims standards |
Resolver: strengths and trade-offs
- Excellent incident and investigations workflow
- Links incident data to risk assessment credibly
- Kroll relationship brings advisory depth
- No GCC hosting or Arabic UI
- Audit module is comparatively shallow
Riskonnect: strengths and trade-offs
- Broad risk coverage including RMIS and claims
- Castellan brings credible BCM capability
- Single-vendor consolidation appeal
- Modules vary in maturity and UX consistency
- No Arabic UI; limited regional content
Bottom line
Choose Resolver if: organisations where incidents, investigations and security events drive the risk programme.
Choose Riskonnect if: organisations consolidating insurable risk, ERM and BCM with one vendor.