Transparency alternatives to Atarim
Other Creative review and approval vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Atarim. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 41 that differ from Atarim on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Atarim has 6 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, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Atarim” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Atarim | Found at Atarim, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balsamiqbalsamiq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Balsamiq | 77/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Marker.iomarker.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Marker.io | 74/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Marvelmarvelapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Marvel | 48/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Sketchsketch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sketch | 61/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Bugherdbugherd.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bugherd | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Approval Studioapproval.studioSee also Transparency alternatives to Approval Studio | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Axureaxure.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Axure | 39/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 4 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Flowmappflowmapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Flowmapp | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Frame.ioframe.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Frame.io | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Moqupsmoqups.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Moqups | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Overflowoverflow.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Overflow | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Volleyvolleyapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Volley | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +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.