Comparison Overview

LPL Financial

VS

BlackRock

LPL Financial

4707 Executive Drive, San Diego, CA, US, 92121-1968
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

LPL Financial Holdings Inc. (Nasdaq: LPLA) is among the fastest growing wealth management firms in the U.S. As a leader in the financial advisor-mediated marketplace, LPL supports over 29,000 financial advisors and the wealth management practices of approximately 1,100 financial institutions, servicing and custodying approximately $1.9 trillion in brokerage and advisory assets on behalf of approximately 7 million Americans. The firm provides a wide range of advisor affiliation models, investment solutions, fintech tools and practice management services, ensuring that advisors and institutions have the flexibility to choose the business model, services, and technology resources they need to run thriving businesses.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 14,111
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

BlackRock

50 Hudson Yards, New York, NY, 10001, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

BlackRock is a global asset manager and technology provider dedicated to helping more and more people experience financial well-being. We help millions of people invest to build savings that serve them throughout their lives. We always start with our clients’ needs and look to offer them more quality choices for how and where to invest their money. Our global investments platform offers our clients access to the world’s markets while making investing easier and more affordable. And with offices in more than 40 countries, our global expertise helps them navigate changing markets to stay ahead of the curve. Follow us for global insights shaping the economy, conversations about financial well-being and more information on culture and careers at BlackRock. https://bit.ly/3n6Fxdy

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 27,826
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lpl-financial.jpeg
LPL Financial
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/blackrock.jpeg
BlackRock
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
LPL Financial
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BlackRock
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LPL Financial in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BlackRock in 2025.

Incident History — LPL Financial (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LPL Financial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — BlackRock (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BlackRock cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lpl-financial.jpeg
LPL Financial
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Email Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2018
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 2/2012
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Theft of Employee's Desktop Computer
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/blackrock.jpeg
BlackRock
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Website
Blog: Blog

FAQ

BlackRock company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to LPL Financial company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

LPL Financial company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to BlackRock company.

In the current year, BlackRock company and LPL Financial company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BlackRock company nor LPL Financial company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both BlackRock company and LPL Financial company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither BlackRock company nor LPL Financial company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither LPL Financial company nor BlackRock company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

BlackRock company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to LPL Financial company.

BlackRock company employs more people globally than LPL Financial company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds HIPAA certification.

Neither LPL Financial nor BlackRock holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N