SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to fynk

Other Contract management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at fynk. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 32 that differ from fynk on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

fynk has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, 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 fynk” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at fynkFound at fynk, not found there
ContractSafecontractsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ContractSafe 70/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +2 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Ironcladironcladapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ironclad 52/100 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Weagreeweagree.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Weagree 35/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Congaconga.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Conga 35/100 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
LinkSquareslinksquares.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LinkSquares 30/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Outlawgetoutlaw.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Outlaw 30/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Spotdraftspotdraft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Spotdraft 30/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Agiloftagiloft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Agiloft 22/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Gatekeepergatekeeperhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gatekeeper 39/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Contractbookcontractbook.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Contractbook 35/100 2 Subprocessor list, Certifications named 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Zefortzefort.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zefort 30/100 2 Status page with history, Certifications named 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Jurojuro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Juro 17/100 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 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.