Transparency alternatives to Integrate.io
Other Data integration vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Integrate.io. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 46 that differ from Integrate.io on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Integrate.io 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 Integrate.io” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Integrate.io | Found at Integrate.io, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estuaryestuary.devSee also Transparency alternatives to Estuary | 65/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Prefectprefect.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Prefect | 65/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Astronomerastronomer.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Astronomer | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Keboolakeboola.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Keboola | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Snowplowsnowplow.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Snowplow | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Redpandaredpanda.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Redpanda | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Datafolddatafold.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datafold | 35/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| Ducodu.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Duco | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Matillionmatillion.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Matillion | 61/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Captain Datacaptaindata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Captain Data | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | Compare |
| Riveryrivery.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Rivery | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Striimstriim.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Striim | 41/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, 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.