Alternatives to Cloudways
Other Cloud hosting vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Cloudways does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 26 that differ from Cloudways on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Cloudways has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “publishes and Cloudways does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Cloudways does not | Cloudways publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exoscaleexoscale.com | 87/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Vercelvercel.com | 65/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Netlifynetlify.com | 57/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Railwayrailway.com | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 4 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | Compare |
| DigitalOceandigitalocean.com | 75/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Kinstakinsta.com | 70/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Renderrender.com | 70/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cloudflarecloudflare.com | 65/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| UpCloudupcloud.com | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 4 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | Compare |
| Aptibleaptible.com | 55/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Fly.iofly.io | 55/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Herokuheroku.com | 50/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.