External signals only — no internal control evidence.
Compare / Security ratings
Ratings score the outside. Valty proves the inside.
Security ratings platforms assess external attack surface signals and produce a score. Valty connects internal control evidence, financial context, and proof artifacts to that score so the number means something in a board room or IC meeting.
Map your internal evidence sourcesInternal evidence → financial impact → board-ready proof.
Valty complements ratings workflows; it does not substitute external signal coverage.
Legacy archetype
What a security ratings workflow does — and where it stops.
Security ratings workflow
- Source
- Workflow archetype — no specific vendor named
- Confidence
- Description based on published methodology patterns
- Freshness
- Reviewed at design-partner stage
What Valty adds
- Source
- Evidence-to-proof layer above the existing workflow
- Confidence
- Design-partner stage — scope per source coverage
- Freshness
- Reviewed per design-partner cohort
What Valty does not replace
- Source
- The security ratings workflow workflow itself
- Confidence
- Valty complements, not substitutes
- Freshness
- Boundary reviewed per product change
Claim discipline on this page
- Source
- No fabricated competitor metrics or named vendors
- Confidence
- Comparison is archetype-to-Valty, not brand-to-Valty
- Freshness
- Reviewed before publication
The Security ratings workflow produces output without a proof chain.
An outside-in score derived from passive external scanning — IP reputation, certificate hygiene, open ports, and dark web signals. Useful for vendor screening and board-level optics, but the score does not carry internal control evidence, financial materiality, or a proof artifact that can leave the room.
Valty reads the output and connects it to internal evidence.
Security ratings evidence enters Valty as a source signal. It is normalized into an evidence object with owner, freshness, and confidence — the same structure as internal controls and findings.
Evidence becomes a financial estimate with visible assumptions.
The FAIR-style exposure model consumes the connected evidence. Every estimate shows method, confidence band, and source coverage — not just a number.
The claim leaves as a proof artifact, not a dashboard screenshot.
Board packs, proof cards, and IC briefs export with source, confidence, freshness, and blocked-claim state. Claims that are stale or unsupported are labeled before they leave the platform.
Evaluation rubric
Where Valty wins and why.
Each dimension is the thing a PE operating partner, CISO, or CFO needs from a security workflow that a legacy security ratings workflow cannot provide alone. No fabricated competitor claim. No unnamed competitor score. Design partner
DimensionSecurity ratings workflowValtyClaim note
EBITDA / dollar translationScore movement is not tied to a financial model. The business meaning of a score change is left to the reader.Internal control evidence feeds a FAIR-style exposure model. The dollar estimate carries method, confidence band, and assumption transparency adjacent to the claim.Design-partner stage — financial model is illustrative until source coverage is verified per tenant.
Board-ready proof artifactA score report or PDF export. Claims are sourced from external signals only. Internal evidence is not included.A proof pack that chains internal control state, finding evidence, and financial exposure into a board brief. Blocked claims are labeled before export.Design-partner stage — artifact scope depends on source system connections available at time of engagement.
PE hold-period workflowA static score across portfolio companies. Improvement action is not ranked by business impact or remediation ROI.Portfolio command surface ranks remediation by value impact across the hold period. Each action carries owner, proof status, and financial delta.Design-partner stage — portfolio rollup requires multi-company tenant setup.
Method transparencyScoring methodology is often proprietary. Buyers cannot inspect which signals produced the score or how weighting was applied.Every financial estimate carries the FAIR-style assumption set and confidence tier in the same view. Method is inspectable before the claim is published.Source coverage gaps reduce confidence; Valty labels those gaps rather than hiding them.
Claim disciplineThe score is presented as ground truth. Freshness, source limitations, and blocked evidence are not visible in the output.Claims carry source, confidence, and freshness. Stale or unsupported claims are blocked at export rather than published with caveats buried in footnotes.Claim review is a workflow step in Valty, not a post-publication correction.
Proof matrix
What this comparison page can and cannot claim
Every comparison statement carries its source and limitation. No competitor is named. No fabricated outcome is presented.
ClaimSourceConfidenceFreshness
Archetype comparisonPublished workflow patterns — no specific vendorAccurate at design-partner stageReviewed before publication
Financial model capabilityValty product — design-partner stageIllustrative — depends on source coverage per tenantReviewed per design-partner cohort
Proof artifact capabilityValty product — design-partner stageScope calibrated through early-access engagementsReviewed per product change
Named competitor resultsNot published — no fabricated competitor claimBlockedNot applicable
Next step
See how Valty sits above your existing security ratings workflow.
Design-partner engagements start with source-system mapping. Bring the security ratings output you already have.