Transparency alternatives to Chameleon
Other Customer success and onboarding vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Chameleon. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from Chameleon on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Chameleon has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, 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 Chameleon” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Chameleon | Found at Chameleon, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dockdock.usSee also Transparency alternatives to Dock | 87/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Totangototango.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Totango | 74/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| Rocketlanerocketlane.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rocketlane | 68/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Arcadearcade.softwareSee also Transparency alternatives to Arcade | 57/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Navatticnavattic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Navattic | 57/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Custcust.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Cust | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Gainsightgainsight.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gainsight | 61/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Inline Manualinlinemanual.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Inline Manual | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| ClientSuccessclientsuccess.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ClientSuccess | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | Compare |
| Custifycustify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Custify | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| GUIDEcxguidecx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GUIDEcx | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Walnutwalnut.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Walnut | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 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.