What customers say about Coverbase: “Transparency into our third-party risk” “A real partner enabled by technology” “From reactive to proactive and predictive” “A decision before my coffee’s cold” “More predictive, less just doing assessments” “Better visibility, all the way to the board”

Agentic third-party
risk and security.

01 · Customers

The best companies trust Coverbase.

02 · Applied AIWhy Coverbase

Coverbase works across the whole vendor lifecycle.

01

Agents check supplier evidence against your requirements.

Agents read supplier documents and flag what falls short. Your team reviews the exceptions, with the source material close at hand.

02

Every stage works from one vendor record.

Intake, monitoring, inspection, and contracts share supplier context. A new signal can inform the next assessment instead of getting lost in another system.

03

Your controls and reviewers shape each assessment.

Apply the controls your program uses, then incorporate your reviewers' decisions into future assessments. The system works around how your team evaluates risk.

03 · ProductIllustrative product view
Coverbase
Supplier workspace
Work queue
One supplier record
Evidence.
Decisions.
Follow-through.
Your program, connected

Each supplier signal has an owner and a next step.

The evidence and reviewers behind each decision, in one view.

Explore agents
4Supplier examples
2Need your judgment
1Connected record per supplier
Northstar Cloud
Review notification terms
Meridian Systems
Investigate a score change
Atlas Analytics
Confirm an access finding
Fieldwork Software
Collect access-review evidence
Findings stay linked to their source and owner.
Review contextSecurity
Northstar Cloud
The evidence is linked, and your team decides the exception.
SOC 2 report
Security controls documented
DPA · clause 8.2
Notification window: 72 hours
Your clause playbook
Required window: 48 hours
Next action
Security reviews the notification gap before approval.
Sample suppliers and outcomes. An illustration of the workflow, not live customer data.

Agents for each stage of third-party management.

One connected platform
Built for the work between intake and renewal.
Autonomous IntakeFig. 01 · agent trace
Requests arrive with supplier research attached.
Employee request
Supplier context
Payee details
Agent work3 STEPS
01Understand the need
02Gather context
03Flag what is missing
Ready for review
Procurement sees the request and its open questions.
Explore Autonomous Intake →
TPM-Bench v2 · 331 cases · 6 frontier models
+0.11Coverbase ahead of Claude Opus 5.5, the top frontier model on its own0.84 against 0.73, 95% interval +0.07 to +0.15, n = 331
41 of 46Cases without third-party submitted info where Coverbase did better, none worseAgainst Claude Opus 5.5
+0.15Coverbase ahead on cases with third-party submitted info113 cases, 95% interval +0.08 to +0.21; against Claude Opus 5.5
92%Cases where Coverbase passed every blockerClaude Opus 5.5 on its own: 85%

Coverbase and each frontier model ran with the same instructions and company documents. Method and full results: Applied AI

How Coverbase compares to frontier models.

Coverbase consistently scores higher than frontier AI models, including Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5, on every group of cases below.

Coverbase against frontier modelsTPM-Bench v2
0.84
0.73
0.68
0.81
0.29
0.26
0.75
0.61
0.52
All cases331 cases
Without third-party submitted info46 cases
With third-party submitted info113 cases

Mean case score from 0 to 1. The gray bars are Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 on their own, with the same instructions and company documents. The last two groups split cases by whether the answer uses information submitted by the third party.

Data
CasesCoverbaseClaude Opus 5.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
All cases (n = 331)0.840.730.68
Without third-party submitted info (n = 46)0.810.290.26
With third-party submitted info (n = 113)0.750.610.52

The difference comes from Coverbase’s AI harness. It brings your vendor data, relationship context, submitted information, and research into each decision, under your own controls.

06 · Industries
07 · Reasons01 to 17 of 17

17 reasons
to choose Coverbase.

What the platform does, and the work it takes off your team.

01

Agents review every supplier, not only the largest.

Your supplier network grows faster than your team. Coverbase puts agents to work on the research, evidence gathering, and review that sit between a new business relationship and a confident decision.

Security, financial, legal, and compliance evidence belong in the same record. In TPM-Bench, the cases a frontier model cannot solve on its own are the ones whose decisive fact is a renewal date, an open finding, an owner on leave, or a sanctions change held in Coverbase.

Score without and with third-party submitted infoFig. 01 · TPM-Bench v2
0.81
0.29
0.75
0.61
Without third-party submitted info46 cases
With third-party submitted info113 cases

Mean case score from 0 to 1, Coverbase and Claude Opus 5.5 on its own, with cases split by whether the answer uses information submitted by the third party.

Data
CasesCoverbaseClaude Opus 5.5
Without third-party submitted info (n = 46)0.810.29
With third-party submitted info (n = 113)0.750.61
02

New documents update the assessment directly.

A document arriving should move an assessment forward, not add another item to an analyst's queue. Coverbase reads the material, checks it against your requirements, and identifies what still needs an answer.

In TPM-Bench, Coverbase scores 0.84. The strongest frontier model on its own, Claude Opus 5.5, scores 0.73.

Coverbase against frontier modelsFig. 02 · TPM-Bench v2
Coverbase0.84Blocker pass 92%
Claude Opus 5.50.73Blocker pass 85%
Claude Opus 50.69Blocker pass 79%
Claude Sonnet 5.50.68Blocker pass 81%
Claude Haiku 5.50.55Blocker pass 68%
Claude Sonnet 50.53Blocker pass 67%
Claude Sonnet 4.60.51Blocker pass 65%

Mean score over 331 cases, from 0 to 1, for Coverbase and for each model on its own with the same instructions and company documents. Blocker pass is the share of cases where no blocker failed.

Data
SystemScore95% intervalBlocker pass
Coverbase0.840.81 to 0.8792%
Claude Opus 5.50.730.69 to 0.7785%
Claude Opus 50.690.64 to 0.7379%
Claude Sonnet 5.50.680.64 to 0.7381%
Claude Haiku 5.50.550.50 to 0.6068%
Claude Sonnet 50.530.48 to 0.5867%
Claude Sonnet 4.60.510.47 to 0.5665%
03

Supplier research is done before the first conversation.

Start with a supplier's public footprint, financial information, sanctions exposure, and adverse media. Coverbase researches these sources and prepares the intake information your team needs to evaluate the relationship.

The result is a better starting point for procurement and risk. Less asking for what is already available. More attention to what is actually missing.

Illustrative workflowFig. 03 · illustrative
Research / 1 of 3
Start with the evidence.
Bring public records, security documents, and supplier information into the review.
Public business records
Source linked
Security documentation
Evidence prepared
Financial information
Ready to review
04

Evidence is evaluated against your own control set.

Your policies define an acceptable supplier. Coverbase evaluates evidence against your control set rather than asking your team to work around a fixed scoring model.

Your reviewers' decisions help shape future assessments. Program knowledge stays with the program, instead of disappearing into individual inboxes.

Evidence mapped to your requirementsFig. 04 · illustrative
ControlEvidenceReview
Access managementIdentity and access policyEvidence linked
Data protectionSecurity assessmentEvidence linked
Business continuityRecovery planReviewer input
Incident responseNotification procedureEvidence linked
05

Low-risk reviews use public evidence instead of questionnaires.

A straightforward supplier shouldn't require a long exchange of questionnaires. Coverbase assembles evidence from trust centers, public filings, and connected data sources to complete low-risk assessments.

Reserve the deeper investigation for the relationships where exposure, criticality, or missing evidence demands it.

06

Monitoring continues after the contract is signed.

Approval is a moment. Exposure keeps changing. Coverbase follows supplier signals across risk domains and brings new developments back into the vendor record.

When something changes, your team can investigate the impact, contact the supplier, and carry the finding into the next review.

The largest gap in the benchmark is REPORT, where a board or regulator number has to reconcile with the record: 0.93 for Coverbase, 0.45 for Claude Opus 5.5 on its own.

Monitoring and reporting suitesFig. 06 · TPM-Bench v2
REPORT n = 110.93 / 0.45
DRES n = 90.90 / 0.56
PORTFOLIO n = 170.75 / 0.44
DCOMP n = 170.89 / 0.60
MONITOR n = 160.79 / 0.51
INCIDENT n = 110.76 / 0.67

Mean score per suite, Coverbase and Claude Opus 5.5 on its own. n per suite: REPORT 11, DRES 9, PORTFOLIO 17, DCOMP 17, MONITOR 16, INCIDENT 11.

Data
SuitenCoverbaseClaude Opus 5.5
REPORT110.930.45
DRES90.900.56
PORTFOLIO170.750.44
DCOMP170.890.60
MONITOR160.790.51
INCIDENT110.760.67
07

Agents inspect vendor configurations with read-only access.

A written answer describes a configuration. An inspection examines it. With read-only access, Coverbase agents inspect vendor application settings, access controls, and integrations.

Findings become part of the supplier's risk profile, connecting what a vendor says with what your team can verify.

08

Contract obligations are extracted and tracked.

Service levels, breach terms, and other obligations are too important to leave inside a PDF. Coverbase extracts them from supplier contracts and tracks supplier performance against monitoring data and supplier reports.

When the evidence changes, risk findings can inform contract addenda. Legal commitments and operational reality stay in the same view.

Illustrative contract workflowFig. 08 · illustrative
Contract → obligations
From language to obligations.
Supplier agreement
Service commitments
Notification terms
Availability and performance
Review and renewal
Incident notification
Source clause linked
Service-level commitment
Source clause linked
Evidence renewal
Source clause linked
09

Fourth-party monitoring shows each supplier's dependencies.

Your direct supplier is not always the end of the chain. Fourth-party monitoring brings another layer of dependencies into view.

Give your team the context to investigate how an issue elsewhere in a supplier's network could affect your own business.

10

Findings link to follow-up work and supplier outreach.

An identified issue needs a next step. Coverbase connects assessment exceptions, follow-up questions, and supplier outreach so the review can keep moving.

Keep the evidence and the response close to the finding. Your team can focus on resolving an issue instead of reconstructing its history.

From finding to follow-throughFig. 10 · illustrative
01
Finding identified
The exception is linked to its supporting evidence.
02
Owner assigned
The right reviewer has the context to act.
03
Supplier contacted
The missing information becomes a clear request.
04
Evidence reviewed
The response informs the next decision.
11

Risk review begins at procurement intake.

Procurement and security are working on the same relationship. Coverbase connects supplier intake, sourcing, and review so risk context can inform the purchase rather than arrive after it.

Autonomous Intake, RFP support, and workflow automation give the process a common starting point.

12

Coverbase works with the frameworks you already use.

SOC 2, NIST CSF, DORA, ISO 27001, or a control set your team built itself. Coverbase works with the requirements already shaping your program.

Start with the standards you need to meet. Apply them consistently across documents, suppliers, and assessments.

13

Coverbase connects to your existing GRC platforms.

A new capability shouldn't require a new operating model. Coverbase can work alongside ServiceNow, ProcessUnity, Aravo, Archer, and other GRC platforms.

Connect through integrations or an API when your team is ready. Keep the context flowing between the places where decisions happen.

Illustrative integrationsFig. 13 · illustrative
Coverbase
ServiceNow
ProcessUnity
Aravo
Archer
Your API

Connect when you're ready. Start without integrations.

14

You can start without connecting other systems.

You can begin with documents and assessments, without connecting another system first. Coverbase supports a standalone deployment as well as a more connected setup.

Choose the entry point that makes sense for your team, then extend it as the program develops.

15

The MCP server and in-app agents work inside your existing tools.

Coverbase's MCP server and in-app agents bring third-party management capabilities into connected tools. The next action can start closer to the conversation or system that prompted it.

Your team gets another way to work with Coverbase without making every task a trip to a separate application.

16

Managed services are available alongside the software.

Some programs need capacity. Others need an experienced team to run more of the process. Coverbase offers managed third-party risk services alongside its software.

Choose the support your organization needs, with human experts available for the work that calls for judgment.

17

Each review builds on what earlier reviews found.

Intake, assessment, monitoring, inspection, and contracts are connected parts of a business relationship. Evidence gathered in one stage should improve the decisions made in another.

Coverbase connects that work around the supplier. The next review starts with what you already know, not another blank page.

Score by suite, Coverbase and Claude Opus 5.5Fig. 17 · TPM-Bench v2
REPORTDRESFORECASTPORTFOLIODCOMPMONITORDAIMASTERASSESSQUANTINTAKEINCIDENTDSECRELATEGOVERNHANDOFFSOURCEREVIEWCONTRACTCHANGECOMMSONBOARDPERF
Coverbase0.930.900.900.750.890.790.930.850.840.970.900.760.930.890.910.860.970.820.680.940.930.910.74
Claude Opus 5.50.450.560.570.440.600.510.730.670.680.820.770.670.850.810.850.810.920.790.660.920.930.910.74
n119817171691013911111481011711208689

Mean score per suite, Coverbase and Claude Opus 5.5 on its own, ordered by the gap. Darker is higher.

Data
SuitenCoverbaseClaude Opus 5.5Gap
REPORT110.930.45+0.47
DRES90.900.56+0.34
FORECAST80.900.57+0.34
PORTFOLIO170.750.44+0.31
DCOMP170.890.60+0.29
MONITOR160.790.51+0.28
DAI90.930.73+0.20
MASTER100.850.67+0.18
ASSESS130.840.68+0.15
QUANT90.970.82+0.15
INTAKE110.900.77+0.13
INCIDENT110.760.67+0.09
DSEC140.930.85+0.08
RELATE80.890.81+0.08
GOVERN100.910.85+0.06
HANDOFF110.860.81+0.05
SOURCE70.970.92+0.04
REVIEW110.820.79+0.02
CONTRACT200.680.66+0.02
CHANGE80.940.92+0.02
COMMS60.930.930.00
ONBOARD80.910.910.00
PERF90.740.740.00

Agentic third-party risk and security.