SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Workable

Other Applicant tracking vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Workable. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 43 that differ from Workable on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Workable has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Workable” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at WorkableFound at Workable, not found there
Jobvitejobvite.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jobvite 83/100 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Named privacy contact Compare
JazzHRjazzhr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to JazzHR 65/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact Compare
SmartRecruiterssmartrecruiters.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SmartRecruiters 57/100 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
PrimePROprimepro.netSee also Transparency alternatives to PrimePRO 48/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 Compare
Joinjoin.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Join 39/100 2 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116) 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 Compare
Bullhornbullhorn.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bullhorn 48/100 1 Notice before subprocessors change 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Leverlever.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Lever 43/100 1 Notice before subprocessors change 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact Compare
iCIMSicims.comSee also Transparency alternatives to iCIMS 39/100 1 Notice before subprocessors change 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing Compare
Ashbyashbyhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ashby 35/100 1 Uptime SLA with a figure 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
Greenhousegreenhouse.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Greenhouse 22/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 Compare
Workrwcc-group.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Workr 6/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 Compare
Homerunhomerun.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Homerun 43/100 nothing we found there and not here 2 Data location stated, Certifications named 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.