Manage Risk
Standardize AI risk review across every use case
Ad hoc risk review means two reviewers can look at the same use case and land somewhere different. Trustible scores every use case against the same rules, routes it to the right reviewer, and logs every decision along the way.
Continuous AI governance lifecycle
Intake
Manage Risk
Monitor
Comply
The problem
Ad hoc risk management doesn't scale
Reviewing AI use cases one at a time by judgment call works when there are a handful. It breaks down the moment AI adoption grows past what any team can track by hand.
Risk management without a systemAd hoc review
- Two reviewers reach different conclusions, with no shared framework
- No way to tell what needs scrutiny and what can move fast
- Risk lives in spreadsheets, with no audit trail when asked
- Impact assessments happen late, often after launch
- No named owner, so decisions stall until someone chases them
Risk management with TrustibleOne scored, routed system
- Every use case is scored the same way, so reviews reconcile
- Automated tiering flags what needs scrutiny and fast-tracks the rest
- Every score, override, and decision is logged automatically
- Impact assessments trigger the moment risk crosses the line
- Role-based routing gives every review a named owner
Platform capabilities
What's included
Everything you need to score, route, and record AI risk for your company
Risk Scoring
Trustible's rules-based engine maps every intake response to risk Attributes across five categories. It scores inherent risk, tiers each use case, and recommends the right governance response, from fast-track approval to full impact assessment.
See how
Risk Registry
Dynamically recommends risks and mitigations based on the specific use case.
See how
Routing & Approvals
Role-based permissions route each governance task to the right reviewer, with full context already populated.
See how
Audit Trail
Complete audit trail and documentation. Every score, override, and decision logged with field-level precision.
See how
The Risk Hub
One view of risk across every use case
The Risk Hub gives governance teams a single place to see every score, every tier, and every open assessment, with the built-in assistant on hand to answer questions about any use case in the registry.
Portfolio risk overview
342 use cases · updated 2 hours ago
DashboardTaxonomyAssessments
342
Use cases scored
100%
High-risk assessed
78%
Mitigation coverage
6
Open assessments
Mitigation coveragePortfolio
78%
Covered
Mitigated 62%
Partially mitigated 24%
Unmitigated 14%
Risk level distributionBy tier
Risk taxonomyCurated library
Generative AIHigh
Agent orchestration exploitation
SecurityMed
Model & asset theft
PrivacyHigh
Confidential data exposure
AI-assisted assessment Answer with AI
How is the model adapted for this use case?
AI explanation · Grounding lowers hallucination risk but inherits source-document access controls. Verify data scoping before approval.
The human layer
Expert risk logic embedded at every step
The scoring rules behind every risk tier are built by practitioners who've run AI risk programs inside regulated enterprises, and updated as incidents and regulations evolve.
Calibrated
to your risk appetite
Adapted
to your org structure
Defensible
from day one
Frequently asked
Questions about AI risk management
What counts as a use case needing review?
Any AI system, model, agent, or vendor tool that makes or informs a decision enters intake and is scored. The score and tier then decide how much review it needs — low-risk use cases fast-track, while higher-risk ones route to full impact assessment.
How is inherent vs. residual risk calculated?
Inherent risk is scored from intake responses across five categories — Performance, Data Privacy, Cybersecurity, Ethical, and Legal — before any controls are applied. Residual risk reflects the same categories after documented mitigations are in place, so you can see what the safeguards actually change.
Can we override an automated score?
Yes. Reviewers can accept the automated score or override it with documented rationale. Either way, the change is logged to the audit trail with who made it, when, and why — so the record stays complete.
Does risk scoring replace our existing GRC tool?
No. Trustible handles AI-specific governance — scoring, impact assessments, routing, and audit trail — and feeds those decisions and evidence to your existing GRC system rather than replacing it.
Which frameworks does the scoring map to?
Assessments and taxonomies align to the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, and industry-specific standards. Trustible's team keeps them current as requirements evolve, so mappings don't fall behind.
How quickly can we get started?
Most teams are live within 30 days. Dedicated governance experts help configure scoring thresholds and routing logic to match your organization's actual risk appetite, so the system reflects how you review AI from day one.
Related Solutions
Explore our platform
Monitor
Internal and External AI Monitoring
Continuous oversight of live AI systems, with key metrics and incidents tracked against every use case.
Explore
Comply
AI Compliance and Audit
Map governance controls to 20+ frameworks, including the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, Australia AI standard, and more.
Explore
Intake
AI Use Case Inventory
Every model, agent, and vendor enters one system the moment it's submitted, ready to be scored.
Explore
Get started
Make AI risk scoring consistent and defensible.
Trustible gives your governance team structured risk scoring, automated routing, and audit-ready documentation.