Transparency alternatives to Nansen
Other Crypto compliance and blockchain analytics vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Nansen. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 31 that differ from Nansen on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Nansen has 10 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, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Nansen” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Nansen | Found at Nansen, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CoinTrackingcointracking.infoSee also Transparency alternatives to CoinTracking | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| Notabenenotabene.idSee also Transparency alternatives to Notabene | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| Blockpitblockpit.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Blockpit | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | nothing | Compare |
| Scorechainscorechain.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scorechain | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | nothing | Compare |
| Ellipticelliptic.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Elliptic | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| TaxBittaxbit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TaxBit | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| CoinLedgercoinledger.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CoinLedger | 26/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Crystal Intelligencecrystalintelligence.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Crystal Intelligence | 26/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Bitwavebitwave.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Bitwave | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Ledgibleledgible.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Ledgible | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Request Financerequest.financeSee also Transparency alternatives to Request Finance | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Lukkalukka.techSee also Transparency alternatives to Lukka | 17/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, 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.