Human Risk Score Platforms Compared: How to Actually Measure Your Team's Security

A "human risk score" is just a fancy way of asking, "Who on my team is most likely to click the link that burns us down?"

Finding that answer is vital. But not all platforms measure it the same way. Some give you a generic letter grade, while others dig into specific behaviors to show you exactly where the cracks are and provide recommendations.

This guide compares four top players—Huntress, CybSafe, KnowBe4, and Specops—to help you decide which one gives you the data you actually need.

1. Huntress Security Awareness Training (SAT)

The "Managed" Approach

Huntress takes a different angle. Instead of drowning you in data and making you figure it out, we provide a managed experience. We focus on "compromise rates" and "recovery"—real metrics that show if your team is actually getting safer, not just if they're good at taking tests.

How it measures risk: Huntress focuses on identity-centric risk. We track who is failing phishing simulations, but we also look at real-world data. Because our platform is powered by the threat intel from our SOC (Security Operations Center) protecting millions of endpoints, we know what tradecraft hackers are using today. We use that intel to build our curriculum.
Departmental accuracy: Huntress integrates directly with your identity provider (like Microsoft 365). This means your "risk" data is automatically segmented by the groups and departments you already have. No manual tagging required.
Key differentiator: Phishing Defense Coaching. If a user fails a test, we don't just ding their score. We deliver a "teachable moment"—a non-shaming, educational intervention that fixes the behavior right then and there.
Best for: MSPs and IT teams who want a "set it and forget it" solution that reduces risk without adding administrative work to already overburdened teams. Huntress SAT is also a top-tier solution for large enterprises that need meaningful risk reduction at scale.
Bonus Feature: Managed Learning Paths. Unlike platforms that make you curate your own library, Huntress delivers a curated, story-driven curriculum that evolves automatically based on the current threat landscape, saving you hours of admin time every month.

2. CybSafe

The "Behavioral Science" Approach

CybSafe markets itself as a "Human Risk Management" platform, not just training. They lean heavily on behavioral science and data analytics to measure risk.

How it measures risk: They use a proprietary metric called SebDB (Security Behavior Database) to map user actions to specific security risks. They track over 100 specific behaviors—like whether users are using password managers or updating their OS—to build a comprehensive "Human Cyber Risk" score.
Departmental accuracy: CybSafe is strong here. Their reporting allows you to filter risk scores by region, department, and role. They also offer "peer group analysis," letting you see if your Marketing team is riskier than the industry average for marketers.
Key differentiator: Intervention, not just education. Their platform can trigger "nudges"—small, timely reminders to users—when it detects risky behavior, attempting to change habits in real-time.
Best for: Larger enterprises with a dedicated security awareness officer who wants to nerd out on behavioral data.
Bonus Feature: Custom Workflow Builder. You can automate responses to specific risks, like triggering a Slack message to a user who just failed a simulation or assigning a policy review to a new hire.

3. KnowBe4

The "Volume & Testing" Approach

KnowBe4’s model is built on volume: tons of content and tons of testing.

How it measures risk: Their core metric is the Phish-prone Percentage (PPP). It’s a simple metric: what percentage of your staff is likely to fall for a phish? They compare your PPP against industry benchmarks so you can see where you stand.
Departmental accuracy: They use "Smart Groups" to automate reporting and testing. You can set up rules to automatically group users (e.g., "Finance Dept" or "High-Risk Users") and assign them specific risk scores and training paths.
Key differentiator: Content Library. They have the world’s largest library of training content. If you want a specific video about a specific compliance regulation in a specific language, they probably have it.
Best for: Organizations that want to "check the box" with a massive library or who heavily prioritize phishing simulation metrics above all else.
Bonus Feature: Virtual Risk Officer (VRO). This feature assigns a dynamic risk score to every user, group, and the organization as a whole, using machine learning to predict who is most likely to be compromised based on their behavior and role.

4. Specops (Password Policy)

The "Credential Hygiene" Approach

Specops is the outlier here. They aren't a traditional training platform. Instead, they focus entirely on one specific (and massive) slice of human risk: passwords.

How it measures risk: Specops doesn't give you a "human risk score" for behavior. It gives you a hard, technical audit of your password vulnerability. Their "Breached Password Protection" scans your Active Directory against a database of over 4 billion compromised passwords to find users who are using unsafe credentials.
Departmental accuracy: Since it sits on top of Active Directory, it has perfect visibility into your organizational structure. You can apply different password policies to different groups (e.g., forcing a 20-character passphrase for Admins while being more lenient with standard users).
Key differentiator: Continuous Scanning. Unlike training, which relies on a user remembering to be safe, Specops technically enforces safety by blocking weak or leaked passwords at the moment of creation.
Best for: Teams who want to technically eliminate credential-based risk rather than just training people about it.
Bonus Feature: Dynamic Feedback. When a user changes their password, they get real-time feedback on why a password was rejected (e.g., "This password was found in a leak"), which educates them in the moment without a separate training session.

Comparison: Which human risk score platform fits your team?

Here is a quick breakdown to help you spot the right tool for your specific needs.

Platform	Key Strengths & Pros	Best For
Huntress	• Managed Security: Expert SOC analysts handle the heavy lifting. • Real-Time Data: Curriculum is powered by live threat intel from millions of endpoints. • Actionable: Focuses on fixing behavior with coaching, not just scoring.	All Organizations: Especially those who want enterprise-grade security results without the administrative headache.
CybSafe	• Behavior-Centric: Digs deep into behavioral science and metrics. • Actionable Insights: "Nudges" users to change habits in real-time. • Culture Focus: Great for building a security-first mindset from the ground up.	Culture Building: Teams who have the resources to manage a data-heavy behavioral program.
KnowBe4	• Simulated Threats: The gold standard for sheer volume of phishing templates. • Resource Library: Massive catalog of content for every possible topic. • Benchmarking: Compare your "Phish-prone Percentage" against peers.	Phishing & Compliance: Organizations who prioritize phishing testing volume and need a vast library of generic content.
Specops	• Credential Focus: The best tool for locking down Active Directory passwords. • Specific Metrics: Audits password vulnerability, not general behavior. • Enforcement: Technically blocks risk rather than just training against it.	Password Security: Teams who want to eliminate credential-based risk at the source.

Conclusion: Which score matters?

If you want a scientific, granular breakdown of behavior, CybSafe is a strong tool. If you need a massive library and industry benchmarks, KnowBe4 is the standard. If your biggest worry is weak passwords, Specops is the technical fix.

But if you want to reduce risk without the headache, Huntress is the answer. We combine the "human" element of coaching with the "managed" element of a SOC, giving you a security outcomes-based approach that fits the way you actually work.

It's a metric that quantifies how likely your employees are to cause a security incident. It usually combines data from phishing simulation failures, training completion rates, and sometimes real-world security behavior.

Because an "average" score lies. Your company might have a low risk score overall, but if your Finance department (who creates the wire transfers) has a high risk score, you are still in danger. You need a tool that can slice data by role to find these pockets of risk.

Huntress focuses on actionable metrics like compromise rate and recovery time. Instead of a generic score, we show you exactly which users are struggling and provide the coaching to fix it. We believe in measuring resilience, not just compliance.

Yes. Most modern platforms (including Huntress, KnowBe4, and CybSafe) integrate with Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, and various HRIS systems to automatically sync users and departments.

Continuous is best. Old-school "once a year" testing is dead. You should be running monthly phishing simulations and training to keep security top-of-mind. A platform that automates this schedule ensures you never have a gap in your defense.