Transparency alternatives to Dragonfly
Other Data warehouses and databases vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Dragonfly. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 41 that differ from Dragonfly on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Dragonfly has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Dragonfly” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Dragonfly | Found at Dragonfly, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redisredis.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Redis | 65/100 | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Aivenaiven.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aiven | 78/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Tiger Datatigerdata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tiger Data | 74/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Supabasesupabase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Supabase | 70/100 | 5 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Prismaprisma.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Prisma | 65/100 | 5 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Snowflakesnowflake.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Snowflake | 65/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| SurrealDBsurrealdb.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SurrealDB | 65/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Neonneon.techSee also Transparency alternatives to Neon | 57/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Dremiodremio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dremio | 57/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| MongoDB Atlasmongodb.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MongoDB Atlas | 50/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Databricksdatabricks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Databricks | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Weaviateweaviate.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Weaviate | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | 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.