SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to AccelByte Gaming Services

Other Cloud hosting vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that AccelByte Gaming Services does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 34 that differ from AccelByte Gaming Services on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

AccelByte Gaming Services has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “publishes and AccelByte Gaming Services does not” is the one that closes them.

VendorScorePublishes, and AccelByte Gaming Services does notAccelByte Gaming Services publishes, and they do not
Exoscaleexoscale.com 87/100 8 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +5 nothing Compare
Kinstakinsta.com 70/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +5 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Vercelvercel.com 65/100 8 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +5 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Renderrender.com 74/100 7 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
DigitalOceandigitalocean.com 65/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +4 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Aptibleaptible.com 48/100 6 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Cloudflarecloudflare.com 48/100 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Netlifynetlify.com 43/100 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
WP Enginewpengine.com 35/100 5 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Railwayrailway.com 52/100 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Fly.iofly.io 48/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Scalewayscaleway.com 43/100 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 1 Data location stated 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.