6clicks alternatives
6clicks is the closest thing on the market to what Talarity calls Linked Accounts. Its Hub & Spoke architecture is described as a "proprietary multi-entity architecture" offering "central governance" with "local autonomy" — deploy a Spoke per entity, push frameworks and controls down from the Hub, keep data segregated per entity, and report across all of them. If you are evaluating multi-entity GRC seriously, they belong on your list, and most comparisons will not tell you that because they benchmark everyone against the single-entity SOC 2 crowd instead.
Every claim about 6clicks on this page is drawn from 6clicks's own public pages and linked to its source. Last verified 28 July 2026. Products change — if something here is out of date, tell us and we will correct it.
Where 6clicks is the right choice
If these describe your programme, 6clicks is likely a better fit than we are, and we would rather say so here than waste your evaluation.
- You are an advisor or MSP delivering GRC as a service across many client tenants — their partner motion is built for exactly this.
- You need a very large prebuilt content library; they cite "1,000+ standards, frameworks, and templates ready to go".
- Your structure is unusual — regulators supervising regulated entities, or distributed plants and facilities — which their page calls out directly.
- You want unlimited users and vendors under one enterprise agreement rather than seat-based pricing.
When teams start looking for an alternative
The board asks what an entity's risk is worth
Both platforms roll compliance posture up across entities. The question that separates them is what unit the rollup is expressed in. A consolidated view of control performance tells a parent which entity is behind; it does not tell the board what the exposure costs or whether a remediation is worth funding. FAIR-based quantification with Monte Carlo simulation produces a distribution of financial loss per entity, which is a different conversation from a colour-coded dashboard.
Your entities are US financial institutions
Multi-entity architecture is only half the problem if the frameworks underneath it do not match your examiners. Community banks and credit unions are measured against FFIEC IT, GLBA Safeguards and BSA/AML — and a holding company with several charters needs those per entity, rolled up. That is a narrower requirement than a large general content library, and it is worth testing directly against your own exam scope.
You want to size the thing before a sales call
6clicks does not publish prices. Its pricing page says "Request enterprise pricing" and describes cost as "based on the size of your organization and the number of Spokes you need". That is reasonable for a negotiated enterprise agreement and it is friction if you are building a budget case, comparing options, or simply want to start.
The programme outgrows compliance
Access reviews and joiner-mover-leaver, policy attestation across the whole workforce, vendor tiering that drives reassessment depth, incident to root-cause closure, and BC/DR testing are continuous obligations with no audit date. When those sit outside the multi-entity platform, the parent's consolidated view is only as complete as the parts that were modelled in it.
6clicks and Talarity, side by side
| 6clicks | Talarity | |
|---|---|---|
| Published pricing | No prices published. The page directs buyers to "Request enterprise pricing", and states cost is "based on the size of your organization and the number of Spokes you need". [source] | All three packages carry a published annual price and can be bought online in-app after a trial — including Enterprise Governance, which is the multi-entity package. No sales call required at any level. |
| Multi-entity model | Hub & Spoke — "Define centrally. Operate independently. Report globally." Distributes frameworks, controls and templates from Hub to Spokes with "segregated data and discrete access per entity" and consolidated cross-entity reporting. [source] | Linked Accounts model the same parent/child shape: the parent pushes a control library down and reads a consolidated view, with child organisations priced as a published add-on. This is the dimension on which the two products are most alike. |
| Who it is built for | Names five audiences: large enterprises, government and defence, critical infrastructure, regulators supervising regulated entities, and advisors/MSPs scaling across clients. [source] | Same multi-entity shape, aimed at regulated groups and PE/VC portfolios — parent-controlled programmes where each child is a real company with its own auditor, not a department. |
| Content library | Cites a Content Library with "1,000+ standards, frameworks, and templates ready to go", and unlimited frameworks on both plan families. [source] | 15 frameworks implemented in depth rather than a large template catalogue — including the examination-driven set (FFIEC IT, SOX ITGC, SEC cyber disclosure) with cross-mapping so a control is evidenced once. |
Sources
- 6clicks pricing page — read 28 July 2026
- 6clicks Hub & Spoke architecture page — read 28 July 2026
Common questions
- Is 6clicks a real competitor to Talarity?
- On multi-entity, yes — more so than Vanta or Drata, which are built around single-entity compliance. Hub & Spoke and Linked Accounts solve the same problem with the same parent/child shape. Anyone evaluating multi-entity GRC should look at both, and a comparison that omits them is not being straight with you.
- What actually separates the two?
- Three things worth testing on your own data. Whether risk is expressed in currency or in a score. Whether the frameworks your regulator examines are implemented in depth rather than present as templates. And whether the obligations that outlive an audit — access reviews, attestation, vendor reassessment, continuity testing — are in the same system as the compliance rollup.
- How should we evaluate a multi-entity platform?
- Push a control library from the parent to a child and see what the child can and cannot change. Then break something in one child and check the parent view reflects it without a manual refresh. Multi-entity claims are easy to make and the failure mode is always the same: each entity ends up administered as a separate programme that happens to share a contract.
Further reading
How this works in practice, from the Talarity library.
- Compliance·9 min readSave a security package once, send it on demandA prospect's security team asks for your SOC 2, your pen test, and your current security policies — again. Package Templates save that set as a reusable definition of pinned items plus rules like 'every current SOC 2 report', resolve it fresh each time you send, and hand it over as a redacted, watermarked, time-limited copy with a record of who received what.
- Compliance·6 min readRegulatory submissions — assemble the filing as a case file, not a last-minute scrambleA regulator filing isn't a deadline on a calendar — it's a defensible package: the right capstones, the supporting evidence, an authorized-officer attestation, and a record of exactly what you transmitted. Talarity runs each submission through a Draft → Finalized → Submitted → Acknowledged lifecycle and assembles a sealed dossier with a SHA-256 of what was filed.
- Compliance·8 min readPackage your audit evidence once — for the auditor, regulator, or customerAn auditor asks for your evidence and it's scattered across framework reports, vendor attestations, policy sign-offs, and resilience tests. Evidence Distribution Packages assemble the signed artifacts you already produced into one immutable package, then hand it to each audience as a redacted, watermarked, time-limited copy — with a record of who received what.
- Compliance·14 min readSOC 2 readiness checklistA practitioner's guide to getting audit-ready — what to do in months 1, 2, and 3 to land a clean Type I report and set up cleanly for Type II.
See it on your own frameworks.
Start a 7-day readiness trial — published pricing, no sales call required.