Transparency alternatives to Tina
Other Content management systems vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Tina. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 39 that differ from Tina on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Tina has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Tina” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Tina | Found at Tina, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanitysanity.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sanity | 78/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Storyblokstoryblok.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Storyblok | 74/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +2 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Pantheonpantheon.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Pantheon | 52/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Contentstackcontentstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Contentstack | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Directusdirectus.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Directus | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Uniformuniform.devSee also Transparency alternatives to Uniform | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Shorthandshorthand.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Shorthand | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Craft CMScraftcms.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Craft CMS | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Strapistrapi.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Strapi | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| CloudCannoncloudcannon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudCannon | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Hygraphhygraph.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hygraph | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Ibexaibexa.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Ibexa | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 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.