Comparison Overview

Clicks Group

VS

John Lewis Partnership

Clicks Group

Cnr. Searle and Pontac Streets, Woodstock, Cape Town, ZA, 8000
Last Update: 2025-11-27

As a leader in the healthcare market, Clicks Group is committed to increasing access to affordable primary healthcare for all South Africans through its Clicks Retail pharmacy, pharmaceutical wholesale and distribution businesses. Founded nearly 55 years ago in 1968, Clicks Group is the country’s leading health, beauty and wellness retailer and the largest retail pharmacy chain, with an expanding network of over 850 stores and 670 pharmacies supported by a growing omni channel presence. UPD is the country’s leading full-range pharmaceutical wholesaler and distributer, providing the distribution capability for the group’s healthcare strategy. Listed on the JSE since 1996, Clicks Group’s sustained financial performance and growth in shareholder value has seen the group included in the FTSE/JSE Top 40 Index for the past six years. We care about and contribute to the wellbeing of people, the environment and communities. We are passionate about leading innovation within the unique attributes of our Group. Our focus on a clear vision and growth strategy provides our people with unlimited opportunities. Our Group’s talent strategy is to employ customer-centric people with a confident, ‘can do’ attitude, who are committed and professional. This strategy is underpinned by our employees and our Group values: ‣ We are truly passionate about our customers. ‣ We believe in integrity, honesty and openness. ‣ We cultivate understanding through respect and dialogue. ‣ We are disciplined in our approach. ‣ We deliver on our goals.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 12,174
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

John Lewis Partnership

Carlisle Place, London, England, SW1P 1BX, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

Working in Partnership for a happier world. Our Partnership is an ongoing experiment to find happier, more trusted ways of doing business, for the benefit of us all. We work together to create a successful business and a fairer, more sustainable future for Partners, customers, suppliers and communities. Our Partnership is owned entirely in trust by Partners which means we are more than employees; we share knowledge, power and profit. Our Purpose inspires our principles, drives our decisions and acts as our guide. Visit www.jlpjobs.com directly to view our current opportunities.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 34,251
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clicks-group.jpeg
Clicks Group
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/john-lewis-partnership.jpeg
John Lewis Partnership
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Clicks Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
John Lewis Partnership
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Clicks Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for John Lewis Partnership in 2025.

Incident History — Clicks Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Clicks Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — John Lewis Partnership (X = Date, Y = Severity)

John Lewis Partnership cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clicks-group.jpeg
Clicks Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/john-lewis-partnership.jpeg
John Lewis Partnership
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

John Lewis Partnership company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Clicks Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, John Lewis Partnership company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Clicks Group company.

In the current year, John Lewis Partnership company and Clicks Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither John Lewis Partnership company nor Clicks Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither John Lewis Partnership company nor Clicks Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither John Lewis Partnership company nor Clicks Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Clicks Group company nor John Lewis Partnership company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

John Lewis Partnership company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Clicks Group company.

John Lewis Partnership company employs more people globally than Clicks Group company, reflecting its scale as a Retail.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Clicks Group nor John Lewis Partnership holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H