Transparency alternatives to Agiloft
Other Contract management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Agiloft. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 32 that differ from Agiloft on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Agiloft has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Agiloft” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Agiloft | Found at Agiloft, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ContractSafecontractsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ContractSafe | 70/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +2 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Gatekeepergatekeeperhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gatekeeper | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Ironcladironcladapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ironclad | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
| Congaconga.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Conga | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | Compare |
| Contractbookcontractbook.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Contractbook | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Zefortzefort.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zefort | 30/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| DocJurisdocjuris.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DocJuris | 26/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| fynkfynk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to fynk | 22/100 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Contractifycontractify.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Contractify | 22/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Avokaadoavokaado.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Avokaado | 17/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Ntractsntracts.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ntracts | 17/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Summizesummize.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Summize | 17/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 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.