Transparency alternatives to ARC Software
Other CRM vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at ARC Software. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 108 that differ from ARC Software on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
ARC Software has 11 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at ARC Software” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at ARC Software | Found at ARC Software, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clarifyclarify.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Clarify | 70/100 | 8 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +5 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Nutshellnutshell.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nutshell | 65/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +4 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Insightlyinsightly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Insightly | 61/100 | 7 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +4 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Teamleaderteamleader.euSee also Transparency alternatives to Teamleader | 59/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| HubSpothubspot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HubSpot | 52/100 | 7 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| EspoCRMespocrm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EspoCRM | 65/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| EngageBayengagebay.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EngageBay | 57/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Capsulecapsulecrm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Capsule | 52/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Twentytwenty.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Twenty | 52/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Freshworks (Freshsales)freshworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Freshworks (Freshsales) | 39/100 | 6 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| SuiteDashsuitedash.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SuiteDash | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Coppercopper.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Copper | 43/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 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.