Transparency alternatives to EspoCRM
Other CRM vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at EspoCRM. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 109 that differ from EspoCRM on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
EspoCRM has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at EspoCRM” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at EspoCRM | Found at EspoCRM, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HubSpothubspot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HubSpot | 52/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Freshworks (Freshsales)freshworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Freshworks (Freshsales) | 39/100 | 4 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Clarifyclarify.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Clarify | 70/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Subprocessor list | Compare |
| Teamleaderteamleader.euSee also Transparency alternatives to Teamleader | 59/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | Compare |
| Insightlyinsightly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Insightly | 48/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Closeclose.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Close | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 | Compare |
| Tubulartubular.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Tubular | 26/100 | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +2 | Compare |
| Capsulecapsulecrm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Capsule | 52/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | Compare |
| Twentytwenty.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Twenty | 52/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Coppercopper.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Copper | 43/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Vtigervtiger.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vtiger | 43/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Coeveracoevera.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Coevera | 41/100 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 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.