SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Instaclustr

Other Data warehouses and databases vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Instaclustr. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 41 that differ from Instaclustr on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Instaclustr has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Instaclustr” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at InstaclustrFound at Instaclustr, not found there
Aivenaiven.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aiven 78/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 1 Status page with history Compare
Supabasesupabase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Supabase 70/100 8 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +5 1 Status page with history Compare
SurrealDBsurrealdb.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SurrealDB 65/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +4 1 Status page with history Compare
Tiger Datatigerdata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tiger Data 61/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +4 1 Status page with history Compare
Neonneon.techSee also Transparency alternatives to Neon 61/100 6 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +3 nothing Compare
Prismaprisma.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Prisma 61/100 6 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +3 nothing Compare
Weaviateweaviate.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Weaviate 61/100 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +3 1 Status page with history Compare
Redisredis.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Redis 52/100 6 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +3 1 Status page with history Compare
Dremiodremio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dremio 57/100 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 nothing Compare
Snowflakesnowflake.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Snowflake 52/100 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 nothing Compare
Databricksdatabricks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Databricks 48/100 5 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 1 Status page with history Compare
PlanetScaleplanetscale.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PlanetScale 43/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 2 Status page with history, Public pricing 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.