Haz360 Alternatives
5 of 5 products that share a software category or a capability term with Haz360, matched on what their records document.
Alternative products to investigate
Products whose records share the most documented attributes with Haz360: BowTieXP, Enablon, Safeti, Synergi Life (DNV) and VisiumKMS (alphabetical, not a ranking).
Haz360 record checked 14 October 2026. Sources and limitations in the Haz360 profile · How candidates are matched · Already using Haz360? What to check before switching
Haz360's own record: categories, offline status, pricing and trial
Software categories: Process Safety Management. Offline filter: Not yet classified. Pricing: Haz360 publishes US$2,000/user/year (sale price; list US$2,500) (check product, module and purchase scope) (model: “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”). Pricing sources checked 14 October 2026: partially verified. Trial: trial or demo on request.
- BowTieXP
Shares: Process Safety Management and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Haz360
Why listed: Categories shared with Haz360: Process Safety Management. Tags shared with Haz360: Risk Assessment.
Where it differs: Offline filter: BowTieXP, partial offline workflow; Haz360, not yet classified. Pricing: BowTieXP has no verified published paid amount recorded; Haz360 has a published amount; check the profile's product, module and purchase scope. Trial: BowTieXP, trial status not established; Haz360, trial or demo on request. Conditional in BowTieXP's record (2 of 9 capabilities): “Edition-dependent reports and templates” and “Local desktop files and disconnected activation”.
Against Haz360: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: BowTieXP, “Bowtie scenario authoring and visualization” and “Barrier attributes, accountability and supporting activities” (2 of 3); Haz360, “Audit trail” and “HAZOP-to-SIL data flow” (2 of 3). Pricing model: BowTieXP, “Custom quote”; Haz360, “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”.
- Enablon
Shares: Process Safety Management, Process Safety and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Haz360
Why listed: Categories shared with Haz360: Process Safety Management. Tags shared with Haz360: Process Safety and Risk Assessment.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Enablon, documented offline workflow; Haz360, not yet classified. Pricing: Enablon has no verified published paid amount recorded; Haz360 has a published amount; check the profile's product, module and purchase scope. Trial: Enablon, trial status not established; Haz360, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to Enablon only: EHS Management, Environmental Management, Control of Work and Permit to Work. Conditional in Enablon's record (2 of 8 capabilities): “Permit, isolation and risk-assessment workflows” and “Simultaneous-operations coordination”.
Against Haz360: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Enablon, “EHS and environmental applications” and “Mobile inspection and action-plan capture” (2 of 3); Haz360, “PHA study templates”. Pricing model: Enablon, “Request a scoped proposal”; Haz360, “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”.
- Safeti
Shares: Process Safety Management
Why listed, where it differs, against Haz360
Why listed: Categories shared with Haz360: Process Safety Management. Pricing: Safeti and Haz360 both have published amounts; check each profile's product, module and purchase scope; Safeti has a published amount recorded as “Individual licence from EUR 16,513 per month; Network licence from EUR 19,428 per month” (check product, module and purchase scope).
Where it differs: Conditional in Safeti's record (2 of 5 capabilities): “Occupied buildings risk assessment” and “Extended Explosions add-on”.
Against Haz360: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Safeti, “Loss of containment effects modelling” and “GIS import and export” (2 of 4); Haz360, “PHA study templates” and “Concurrent editing and role permissions” (2 of 5). Pricing model: Safeti, “Published monthly starting rates for an Individual or a Network licence; subscription and perpetual options also offered”; Haz360, “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”.
- Synergi Life (DNV)
Shares: Process Safety Management
Why listed, where it differs, against Haz360
Why listed: Categories shared with Haz360: Process Safety Management. Capability names sharing a term: Haz360's “Audit trail” and Synergi Life (DNV)'s “End-to-end audit planning and findings follow-up”. Pricing: Synergi Life (DNV) and Haz360 both have published amounts; check each profile's product, module and purchase scope; Synergi Life (DNV) publishes EUR 7,000 per year (Entry 5 user pack, VAT not included, annual billing) (check product, module and purchase scope).
Where it differs: Offline filter: Synergi Life (DNV), partial offline workflow; Haz360, not yet classified. Trial: Synergi Life (DNV), free trial documented; Haz360, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to Synergi Life (DNV) only: EHS Management, Incident Management, Permit to Work and Environmental Management. Conditional in Synergi Life (DNV)'s record: “Disconnected field reporting” and “Public anonymous reporting”.
Against Haz360: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Synergi Life (DNV), “Incident investigation and corrective follow-up” and “Contractor and third-party operational controls”; Haz360, “PHA study templates” and “HAZOP-to-SIL data flow”. Pricing model: Synergi Life (DNV), “Custom quote; published entry plans for the risk-management starter pack”; Haz360, “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”.
- VisiumKMS
Shares: Process Safety Management and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Haz360
Why listed: Categories shared with Haz360: Process Safety Management. Tags shared with Haz360: Risk Assessment. Capability names sharing a term: Haz360's “Audit trail” and VisiumKMS's “Audit programme management”.
Where it differs: Pricing: VisiumKMS has no verified published paid amount recorded; Haz360 has a published amount; check the profile's product, module and purchase scope. Trial: VisiumKMS, trial status not established; Haz360, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to VisiumKMS only: Incident Management. Conditional in VisiumKMS's record (2 of 3 capabilities): “Regulatory frameworks named by the vendor” and “Number of modules”.
Against Haz360: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: VisiumKMS, “Incident investigation” and “Corrective action tracking” (2 of 3); Haz360, “PHA study templates” and “Concurrent editing and role permissions” (2 of 4). Pricing model: VisiumKMS, “Platform licence with implementation scoped and priced separately; no amount published”; Haz360, “Per user per year, with paid add-ons; team licences by quotation”. Access, security and record controls: VisiumKMS, “Hosting and deployment options” (documented) and “Integration with external systems, API and SSO” (unverified); Haz360, “Concurrent editing and role permissions” (documented) and “Audit trail” (documented) (2 of 3).
Continue the alternatives research
Check the same evidence-led view from each candidate's starting point; its matched set may differ because the documented record differs.
Already using Haz360? What its record leaves open
Limitations the Haz360 profile records:
- Per-user annual licence; team and enterprise pricing needs a quote
- Action tracking, SIL verification and bow-tie are extra
- Little formal documentation; claims come mainly from vendor blog posts
Available only under stated conditions or not documented (checked 14 October 2026): Recommendation close-out; SIL verification and bow-tie; Hosting choice; Offline editing; Safety-asset database and lifecycle handoff. Check each against the contract you hold.
Listed candidates that document a capability with a related name (confirm the scope in a demo):
- “SIL verification and bow-tie”: Synergi Life (DNV)'s “Bow-tie and barriers”.
Haz360 evaluation checks, for every candidate
- Study fidelity: Rebuild one of your existing HAZOP worksheets in the template, including your risk matrix, and compare the report output. Source
- Data hand-off between studies: Test HAZOP-to-LOPA grouping by SIF tag and what happens when upstream data changes. Source
- Licence and add-on cost: Price users, years and add-ons together; the published figures are per user per year and three are sale prices. Source
- Audit and access control: Check the audit trail and the review and approve roles for external parties such as licensors and vendors. Source
- Hosting and continuity: Confirm hosting location, client-hosted options, backups and support terms; the homepage names 'data hosting flexibility' but no current page gives the details. Source
Leaving Haz360: what to plan for
- A finished study is worth little without its history, and the history here is a log of who changed which text and when. Ask in what form completed worksheets, customised matrices and that log can leave. The record documents importing P&IDs, PFDs and management-of-change records for reference but describes no import of a finished study, so assume the next revalidation will start from reports unless a candidate shows otherwise.
- Open recommendations need their own exit plan. Tracking them is sold as the Action Closeout add-on, with no term or user count stated for add-ons, so a team that lets that add-on lapse, or ends the base licence first, may lose the record of who owes what. Export open and closed recommendations with responses and dashboards before any lapse, and tell external parties who hold actions where to report next.
- Keep the identifiers that tie studies together. Scenarios move from HAZOP into the SIL and LOPA work by SIF tag, so the tag list is the cross-reference between studies, and a new tool that numbers things differently needs a mapping table from you. Recreate the roles for external parties too: view, edit, review, approve and admin roles are described, and licensors and vendors can hold the review role.
Who may have reason to stay with Haz360
- The use case is a consultancy or project team that runs HAZOP and LOPA studies often enough to want shared, audited worksheets. If your column layout and risk matrix are customised, and clients accept the reports produced from them, the rebuild cost is the first thing to price: recreate one existing worksheet in the template and compare the report output before any decision.
- Three reasons to leave are written into the record: recommendation tracking that must come in the base price, users who need offline editing, and a need for a broad EHS or permit system. Haz360 is a study tool for engineers, not a frontline suite. If you are in one of those cases the answer is a different category of product, and the candidates above may or may not be it.
- Pricing is published but moves. On 25 September 2026 the base licence was US$2,000 for one user for a year, shown as a sale from US$2,500, with add-ons priced separately and the record warning that sale prices can change. Price users, years and add-ons together on both sides and ask whether the sale price applies, because a licence that looks cheap per user can cost more once close-out and verification are added.
What to test in a trial of a replacement for Haz360
- Rebuild a study you have already finished, using your own risk matrix and column layout, and set the candidate's printed report next to the original. Differences in layout, wording or calculations show whether the tool fits the way your clients expect studies to look, which a demonstration on the vendor's template will not.
- Have two engineers edit the same node at the same time, adding causes and safeguards, then open the audit trail and check who changed what and when. Add an external reviewer with the review role and see what that person can and cannot change.
- Follow scenarios through to a hand-off and a close-out. Tag three HAZOP scenarios with one SIF, move them into SIL classification, finish a LOPA, then change an initiating cause upstream and see what updates. Finally assign a recommendation to an external party, attach the response and move it to closure, and ask whether that step is in the base price.
Conditions and sources in the Haz360 profile · Recorded commercial terms
Haz360 alternatives — frequently asked questions
Which Haz360 alternatives have published amounts?
Published amounts (see each profile's product, module and purchase scope): Safeti and Synergi Life (DNV). No verified published paid amount recorded: BowTieXP, Enablon and VisiumKMS. Haz360 has a published amount; check the profile's product, module and purchase scope.
Which Haz360 alternatives have a documented offline workflow?
Documented offline workflow: Enablon. Partial offline workflow: BowTieXP and Synergi Life (DNV). Not yet classified: Safeti and VisiumKMS. Offline filter: Haz360, not yet classified.
Which Haz360 alternatives document a free trial?
Free trial documented: Synergi Life (DNV). Trial or demo on request: Safeti. Trial status not established: BowTieXP, Enablon and VisiumKMS. Trial: Haz360, trial or demo on request.