HEAD TO HEAD

Conducttr vs Cyberbit: which crisis simulation platform fits your team?

THE SHORT ANSWER

On our published weights Conducttr scores 6.75 and Cyberbit 5.90. Conducttr scores higher on customisation and pricing clarity; Cyberbit scores higher on executive and board focus, measurement and after-action reporting and regulatory evidence; they tie on scenario realism and exercise delivery effort.

By The Exercise Desk · Crisis Simulation Ranked · Published 2026-10-11

Desk research from public vendor pages, vendor announcements and standards documents read between 27 September and 13 October 2026. Editorial assessment; we did not run any exercise on these platforms.

How do Conducttr and Cyberbit score on each criterion?

Conducttr and Cyberbit: crisis readiness score (editorial assessment, 0 to 10)
Criterion	Weight	Conducttr	Cyberbit	Higher score
Scenario realism	20%	Simulates the information environment around players (news, social media and messaging) with role-specific content; adaptation depends on the facilitator. Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026	Nonlinear exercises in which each answer changes the next step and SOC escalations trigger executive decisions. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Tie
Executive and board focus	20%	Crisis-team exercising at any scale, from one team to 1,000+, but general crisis software rather than built around a cyber board. Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026	Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Cyberbit
Exercise delivery effort	15%	You design the exercise in the Scenario Editor and facilitate it yourself; LISA drafts the events list. Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026	Sold only as an add-on to a Cyberbit Readiness plan, so the executive exercise arrives with a range programme. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Tie
Measurement and after-action reporting	15%	Real-time analytics and central reporting; quantitative behavioural assessment is the paid Assessment Toolkit. Source: Conducttr pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026	A shared dashboard scores decision impact on continuity, reputation and response. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Cyberbit
Regulatory evidence	10%	No framework or regulatory mapping of results is described on the pages reviewed. Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026	References NIST and the CREW framework; no regulatory reporting is described. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Cyberbit
Customisation	10%	Full authoring control in the Scenario Editor, with a template library in Conducttr Worlds. Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026	How scenarios are authored or tailored is not described on the pages reviewed. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Conducttr
Pricing clarity	10%	Four annual licences published, £11,950 to £25,725 a year, plus the Assessment Toolkit from £4,536. Source: Conducttr pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026	No price published. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Conducttr
Total	100%			Conducttr

Which stages of an exercise does each cover?

Build: Documented
You author the exercise in the Scenario Editor; LISA, a "text-to-MEL chatbot", drafts the master events list.
Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026
Adapt: Partial
Role-specific content changes under facilitator control; automatic branching on decisions is not described.
Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026
Seats: Documented
Runs from one team to more than 1,000 simultaneous teams, virtual, in person or hybrid.
Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026
Run: Partial
The organisation's own facilitator runs the exercise with the platform's tools.
Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026
Report: Partial
Real-time analytics and central reporting; quantitative behavioural assessment is the paid Assessment Toolkit.
Source: Conducttr pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026
Map: Not described
No framework or regulatory mapping of results is described on the pages reviewed.
Source: Conducttr homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

A solid segment means the vendor's own pages describe that stage. It shows coverage, not quality; the scores judge quality.

Build: Not described
How a scenario is authored or tailored is not described on the pages reviewed.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Adapt: Documented
Exercises can be linear or nonlinear; in nonlinear mode each answer changes what comes next, and technical escalations trigger executive decisions.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Seats: Documented
Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Run: Not described
Facilitation is not described on the pages reviewed.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Report: Partial
A shared dashboard scores the impact of decisions on continuity, reputation and response.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Map: Partial
The page references NIST and the CREW framework.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

A solid segment means the vendor's own pages describe that stage. It shows coverage, not quality; the scores judge quality.

Conducttr documents 2 of 6 stages and Cyberbit documents 2 of 6.

What do they cost?

Conducttr

Packaging: Annual team licences, published by tier.

Four annual team licences: Raven £11,950, Hawk £16,465, Osprey £21,000 and Eagle £25,725 a year, each for up to 40 participants per session, in GBP excluding tax. Assessment Toolkit from £4,536 a year. Larger exercises and Conducttr Local are priced on request.

Source: Conducttr pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026

Cyberbit

Packaging: Crisis Sim 360 is "only offered as an add-on" to a Cyberbit Readiness plan.

Not published No prices published; the pricing URL returned a 404 when we checked.

Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

Which frameworks do they map results to?

Conducttr

None named on the pages reviewed

Cyberbit

NIST
CREW framework

Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

Which should you choose?

Choose Conducttr if

Customisation: 10 / 10, Full authoring control in the Scenario Editor, with a template library in Conducttr Worlds.
Pricing clarity: 10 / 10, Four annual licences published, £11,950 to £25,725 a year, plus the Assessment Toolkit from £4,536.
Teams that design every inject themselves

Choose Cyberbit if

Executive and board focus: 8 / 10, Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise.
Scenario realism: 7 / 10, Nonlinear exercises in which each answer changes the next step and SOC escalations trigger executive decisions.
Linking a cyber range to executive decisions

Conducttr profile Cyberbit profile Alternatives to Conducttr Alternatives to Cyberbit See them side by side

Frequently asked questions

Is Conducttr or Cyberbit better for executive crisis exercises?

Cyberbit scores higher on executive and board focus (8 against 7 out of 10). Read each profile for the detail.

Which is easier to run, Conducttr or Cyberbit?

They tie on delivery effort, where a higher score means less effort, at 5 out of 10. Read each profile for the detail.

Do Conducttr and Cyberbit publish prices?

Conducttr publishes a price: Four annual team licences: Raven £11,950, Hawk £16,465, Osprey £21,000 and Eagle £25,725 a year, each for up to 40 participants per session, in GBP excluding tax. Assessment Toolkit from £4,536 a year. Larger exercises and Conducttr Local are priced on request. Cyberbit does not publish a price for its exercise product.