Transparency alternatives to Gainsight
Other Customer success and onboarding vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Gainsight. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from Gainsight on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Gainsight has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Gainsight” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Gainsight | Found at Gainsight, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dockdock.usSee also Transparency alternatives to Dock | 87/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | nothing | Compare |
| Custcust.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Cust | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | Compare |
| Totangototango.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Totango | 74/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Rocketlanerocketlane.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rocketlane | 68/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Arcadearcade.softwareSee also Transparency alternatives to Arcade | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Inline Manualinlinemanual.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Inline Manual | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Navatticnavattic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Navattic | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Walnutwalnut.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Walnut | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Akitaakitaapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Akita | 35/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | Compare |
| Userflowuserflow.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Userflow | 30/100 | 2 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| Chameleontrychameleon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Chameleon | 48/100 | 1 Public pricing | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| ClientSuccessclientsuccess.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ClientSuccess | 48/100 | 1 Public pricing | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | 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.