Transparency alternatives to Innodata
Other Data labelling vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Innodata. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 36 that differ from Innodata on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Innodata 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 Innodata” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Innodata | Found at Innodata, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SuperAnnotatesuperannotate.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SuperAnnotate | 57/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Scale AIscale.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scale AI | 52/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| HumanSignalhumansignal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HumanSignal | 43/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| V7v7labs.comSee also Transparency alternatives to V7 | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Hivethehive.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Hive | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing | nothing | Compare |
| Datasaurdatasaur.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Datasaur | 30/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| CVATcvat.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to CVAT | 26/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Encordencord.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Encord | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Kilikili-technology.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kili | 26/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| LXTlxt.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to LXT | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Shaipshaip.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Shaip | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Labelboxlabelbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Labelbox | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 1 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.