Am I the only one who finds the report customization too rigid?

I feel the same way. The canned reports are fine for a quick glance, but for anything board-level, I always end up dumping to CSV and fixing it in Sheets. Kind of defeats the purpose of a paid tool, doesn't it?

Has anyone found a good workaround, or is the API the only way to get truly flexible output? I'm not quite there yet on the skill level for that.

You're not alone in feeling that, especially when starting out. I hit the same wall with quarterly reports.

The workaround I found is to use their "custom fields" on the main objects, then build a dashboard widget off that. It's not perfect, but it lets you surface the specific data points you need for a summary without a full export. You still can't rearrange the visual layout much though, which is a bummer. Hope that helps a bit

It's definitely a known limitation in the platform's current design. I went through the same evaluation last year and confirmed with their support that the out-of-the-box reports are template-driven, which makes them consistent but inflexible.

Your observation about exporting being the only real option is accurate for complex formatting, but there are two intermediate paths I'd suggest exploring before a full commitment. First, their API is quite extensive and can be used to pull data directly into a separate reporting layer, like Power BI. Second, for internal summaries, we've had some success using the "Evidence" or "Issue" custom fields as tagging mechanisms, then filtering the standard reports by those tags to create a more focused, albeit still rigid, view.

If your team's expected format is non-negotiable, you should factor in the development time for an API integration or the manual overhead of regular exports during your cost-benefit analysis.

Yeah, the custom fields trick is a solid first step for sure. I've used that to pull specific risk scores into a dashboard for a quick leadership view.

One caveat I'd add, which you kinda hinted at with the layout, is that this approach can get messy if you need to combine data from different modules. Like, you can't easily make a widget that pulls a custom field from a Control together with a custom field from an Issue on the same chart. You end up needing a separate widget for each, which just moves the rigidity problem around a bit. Still, it's better than nothing!

Exactly. That's the core limitation. It's a workaround for a single module, not a cross-module reporting solution.

For a leadership view, I've just accepted needing two widgets side by side: one for Control risk, one for Issue status. It's not elegant, but it gets the data on one screen. The real fix would be a proper composite widget builder, but I'm not holding my breath.

Until then, it's dashboards for a quick glance and CSV exports for the real work.

Yep, that's a really clear summary of the trade-off. The two-widget solution is exactly where most teams land for that leadership snapshot.

It's worth remembering that for some audiences, that "quick glance" dashboard view is actually enough. They just want the headlines, not the deep formatting. So the rigidity is less of a blocker there. But if your leadership expects a polished, single-page narrative, then yeah, you're back to manual assembly.

I've heard the composite widget idea come up a lot in feature requests. It seems like the logical next step, but you're right to not expect it soon.

Oh yeah, you've hit the main pain point right out of the gate. It's not you, it's a known design choice they've made for consistency. The quarterly summary is where it's most frustrating because management always wants a specific narrative flow.

That "simple" summary you need is probably the hardest thing to build because it requires stitching data points that live in separate silos, like controls and issues. The custom fields workaround others mentioned is a good band-aid for pulling a *single* data point into a dashboard, but it falls apart when you need a cohesive story. For quarterly reports, you'll likely end up with a patchwork of widgets or, yes, the CSV export.

I'd push their sales team on this specific workflow before committing. Ask them to show you, live, how they'd build *your* exact quarterly summary. That usually reveals the gap between the demo and reality.

> I'd push their sales team on this specific workflow before committing.

This is the best advice in the thread. I made them walk through my exact quarterly summary during our trial, and it was eye-opening. The rep was great, but she basically recreated the two-widget patchwork we all keep mentioning. It confirmed there's no magic bullet in the UI.

One extra step I take is using the API to pull those separate silos (controls, issues) into a single Google Sheet that's formatted as our template. It's a bit of a script to set up, but then the sheet just refreshes. It's not a pure Hyperproof solution, but it beats manual CSV assembly every time.

You're absolutely right, and it's a significant gap that becomes apparent during evaluation. The term "simple quarterly summary" is the key pain point, because management's "simple" view almost always requires a composite narrative the platform wasn't built to assemble.

You should treat the reporting as a data extraction layer, not a presentation tool. The workflow that often works is to define exactly which fields from controls, issues, and evidence need to appear on that single summary page. Then, use the API to pull those discrete datasets into a pre-formatted template in Google Sheets or Excel Online. It's an extra step, but it's repeatable and gives you the exact formatting your team expects.

Push their sales team to demonstrate your specific quarterly report live. If they can't build it in the UI, ask for their official API documentation for the data points you'd need. Their answer will tell you everything about how they view this limitation.

Exactly. Treating it as a data extraction layer is the only pragmatic way to frame it. The API-to-Sheets method you mentioned is the real-world fix most teams settle on.

My caveat is that the API documentation itself is often the next bottleneck. It's comprehensive but not always intuitive for pulling composite datasets needed for a summary. You usually need to hit multiple endpoints and join the data yourself externally.

If their sales team can't demo the report, ask them to demo the exact API calls instead. If they can't do that either, you've got your answer.

Yes, making the sales team demo your actual report is so revealing. I had a similar experience - the rep was super helpful, but watching them struggle to merge data on the spot told me everything.

Your Google Sheets setup sounds like the right move. It's the "good enough" solution most of us land on once we accept the platform's limits. One tip that saved me time: use a dedicated sheet as a staging area for the raw API data, then a separate, formatted tab that references it. That way you don't break your template when fields change.

Still, it's frustrating to need a whole external process for a "simple" report, isn't it?

Spot on about making the sales team demo your actual workflow. It's the only way to see the gaps. I did the same thing during our POC and saw the exact same widget patchwork.

Your Google Sheets approach is the smart workaround. I do something similar but with Airtable. The key, like you said, is getting that automatic refresh set up. Once that's running, it's way better than manual exports.

It's just funny how the "simple" management report requires the most complex external setup.