Transparency alternatives to RingCentral
Other Contact centre vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at RingCentral. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 44 that differ from RingCentral on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
RingCentral has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at RingCentral” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at RingCentral | Found at RingCentral, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Talkdesktalkdesk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Talkdesk | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Aircallaircall.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aircall | 70/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| CloudTalkcloudtalk.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudTalk | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Call Handling VCCcallhandling.co.ukSee also Transparency alternatives to Call Handling VCC | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Nextivanextiva.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nextiva | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Enreachenreach.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Enreach | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Puzzelpuzzel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Puzzel | 47/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Status page with history | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| JustCalljustcall.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to JustCall | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Babelforcebabelforce.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Babelforce | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| CallMinercallminer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CallMiner | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Diabolocomdiabolocom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Diabolocom | 30/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Squaretalksquaretalk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Squaretalk | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +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.