Transparency alternatives to SmartBear
Other API management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at SmartBear. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 45 that differ from SmartBear on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
SmartBear has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at SmartBear” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at SmartBear | Found at SmartBear, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redoclyredocly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Redocly | 65/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Svixsvix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Svix | 65/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Postmanpostman.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Postman | 57/100 | 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Hookdeckhookdeck.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hookdeck | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | Compare |
| Apollo GraphQLapollographql.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Apollo GraphQL | 39/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Moesifmoesif.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Moesif | 65/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
| ReadMereadme.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ReadMe | 43/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data processing agreement, Certifications named | Compare |
| Hasurahasura.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Hasura | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Stainlessstainless.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Stainless | 35/100 | 3 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Traefiktraefik.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Traefik | 35/100 | 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Tyktyk.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Tyk | 30/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named | Compare |
| Archbeearchbee.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Archbee | 26/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.