Transparency alternatives to ServiceChannel
Other Maintenance management (CMMS) vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at ServiceChannel. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 60 that differ from ServiceChannel on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
ServiceChannel has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at ServiceChannel” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at ServiceChannel | Found at ServiceChannel, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UpKeepupkeep.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UpKeep | 35/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| MaintainXgetmaintainx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MaintainX | 30/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Fiixfiixsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fiix | 35/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Infraspeakinfraspeak.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Infraspeak | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Limblelimble.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Limble | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Accruentaccruent.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Accruent | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Asset Infinityassetinfinity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Asset Infinity | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Cenoscocenosco.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cenosco | 22/100 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| GEOMAGIC GeoNAMgeomagic.deSee also Transparency alternatives to GEOMAGIC GeoNAM | 17/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Azzierazzier.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Azzier | 14/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| eMaintemaint.comSee also Transparency alternatives to eMaint | 22/100 | 1 Data location stated | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Mendrhubmendrhub.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mendrhub | 22/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | 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.