Transparency alternatives to Tinybird
Other Data warehouses and databases vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Tinybird. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 40 that differ from Tinybird on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Tinybird has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Tinybird” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Tinybird | Found at Tinybird, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aivenaiven.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aiven | 78/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Supabasesupabase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Supabase | 70/100 | 4 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Tiger Datatigerdata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tiger Data | 61/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Snowflakesnowflake.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Snowflake | 65/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| SurrealDBsurrealdb.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SurrealDB | 65/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Neonneon.techSee also Transparency alternatives to Neon | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Prismaprisma.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Prisma | 61/100 | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Redisredis.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Redis | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Databricksdatabricks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Databricks | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| PlanetScaleplanetscale.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PlanetScale | 43/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| DoubleClouddouble.cloudSee also Transparency alternatives to DoubleCloud | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Weaviateweaviate.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Weaviate | 61/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 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.