Skip to main content

Security report for factset.com

FactSet · Finance · N/a

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in SSL/TLS.

Security score

85/100

Risk levelLow

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

FactSet is a leading enterprise provider of financial data, market insights, and analytics, serving a broad range of financial professionals including asset managers, banks, hedge funds, and corporations. The company offers subscription-based services that enable deep company and industry analysis, portfolio management, and execution management, leveraging advanced technologies including AI. The website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design, clear navigation, and comprehensive content tailored to its target audience. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript frameworks and integrates multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Drift chatbot, and Pardot. The site is mobile optimized and accessible, with a cookie consent mechanism indicating GDPR compliance efforts. However, some security best practices like explicit security headers and public security policies are not evident. The security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. The lack of WHOIS data limits domain registration transparency but does not detract from the site's legitimacy given the brand's market position and content quality. Overall, FactSet's website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, technical maturity, and compliance awareness, supporting its role as a trusted financial data provider.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of factset.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching factset.com

This scan found 15 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
77
Security headers
75
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
85

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention factset.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
2,658
Employees
199
Customers
1,944
Third parties
515
Weak passwords
8%

Latest record dated 2026-06-17 · 133 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for factset.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –osso3.factset.com2026-06-17
  • –osso3.factset.com2026-06-15
  • –osso4.factset.com2026-06-15
  • –github.factset.com2026-06-13
  • –osso3.factset.com2026-06-11

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

FactSet holds a strong market position as a trusted financial data and analytics provider with over 40 years of history. Its business model revolves around subscription services targeting financial professionals across multiple sectors such as asset management, banking, hedge funds, and wealth management. The company leverages AI and data integration to enhance its offerings, providing competitive advantages in data extraction, natural language processing, and portfolio analytics. The website content and structure reflect a well-established brand with a global reach, although specific geographic data is not disclosed. FactSet's ecosystem includes developer portals and marketplace solutions, indicating a broad partnership and service network. Growth indicators include continuous innovation in AI and programmatic environments. The absence of direct contact details on the homepage suggests a controlled client engagement model.

Security posture

FactSet's website security maturity is good, with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, demonstrating compliance with privacy regulations like GDPR. The integration of reputable third-party analytics and marketing tools is managed with consent controls. However, the absence of visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and lack of publicly available security or incident response policies indicate areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The WHOIS data unavailability is a minor concern but likely due to privacy protection rather than malicious intent. Overall, the security posture supports business continuity and data protection but would benefit from enhanced transparency and additional security controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a security.txt file and clearly state incident response policies and contact channels to improve transparency and facilitate vulnerability reporting.
  3. Enhance privacy compliance by providing explicit privacy and cookie policies accessible from the homepage and detailing data retention practices.
  4. Consider adding verified company contact information such as support emails and phone numbers to improve user trust and accessibility.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
FactSet
Description
FactSet provides best-in-class financial data, global market insights and analytics, trusted by industry leaders to keep you ahead in finance.
Key services
Financial data, Market insights, Analytics, Portfolio management solutions, AI and data solutions, Execution management systems
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Drift Chatbot, Microsoft Clarity, OneTrust Cookie Consent, Pardot Marketing Automation
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Pardot
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager), Microsoft Clarity, Pardot
Marketing tools
Drift Chatbot, Pardot Marketing Automation
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design
  2. Strong focus on financial data and analytics services
  3. Multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools integrated
  4. Cookie consent mechanism implemented indicating GDPR awareness
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage content
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies publicly visible
  7. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain registration transparency
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern JavaScript-based front-end with asynchronous loading of multiple analytics and marketing scripts, including Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Drift chatbot, and Pardot. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in script loading optimization. No CMS or hosting provider details were explicitly detected. The site uses OneTrust for cookie consent management, indicating a mature approach to privacy compliance. Technical risks are low but could be further mitigated by implementing security headers and reducing third-party script dependencies where possible.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 85/100Low23 findingsView report
  2. 85/100Low23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with factset.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review factset.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.