Transparency alternatives to EvoTalks
Other Contact centre vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at EvoTalks. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 41 that differ from EvoTalks on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
EvoTalks has 11 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at EvoTalks” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at EvoTalks | Found at EvoTalks, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aircallaircall.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aircall | 70/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| CloudTalkcloudtalk.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudTalk | 61/100 | 7 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| CallHippocallhippo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CallHippo | 59/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| RingCentralringcentral.comSee also Transparency alternatives to RingCentral | 43/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| NICEnice.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NICE | 39/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| 2Chat2chat.coSee also Transparency alternatives to 2Chat | 43/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Call Handling VCCcallhandling.co.ukSee also Transparency alternatives to Call Handling VCC | 43/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| JustCalljustcall.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to JustCall | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Nextivanextiva.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nextiva | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| FreeClimbfreeclimb.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FreeClimb | 35/100 | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| CallMinercallminer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CallMiner | 30/100 | 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Genesysgenesys.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Genesys | 26/100 | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | 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.