Transparency alternatives to Looker
Other Business intelligence vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Looker. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 39 that differ from Looker on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Looker has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Looker” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Looker | Found at Looker, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Databoxdatabox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Databox | 57/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Countcount.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Count | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Klipfolioklipfolio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Klipfolio | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Cluviocluvio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cluvio | 48/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Metabasemetabase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Metabase | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Sisensesisense.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sisense | 43/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Jettijetti.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jetti | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| ancoreShareancoresoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ancoreShare | 35/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Hexhex.techSee also Transparency alternatives to Hex | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Modemode.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mode | 35/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| GoodDatagooddata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GoodData | 26/100 | 3 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Growgrow.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Grow | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +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.