Alternatives to Anima
Other Design and prototyping vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Anima does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 23 that differ from Anima on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Anima has 9 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, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “publishes and Anima does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Anima does not | Anima publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recraftrecraft.ai | 52/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Photoroomphotoroom.com | 39/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Splinespline.design | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Pencilpencil.dev | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| UXPinuxpin.com | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Knapsackknapsack.cloud | 17/100 | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Pixelcutpixelcut.ai | 32/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Erasereraser.io | 30/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Supernovasupernova.io | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Visilyvisily.ai | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Specifyspecifyapp.com | 22/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Rewebreweb.so | 17/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.