Transparency alternatives to Imgix
Other Digital asset management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Imgix. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 36 that differ from Imgix on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Imgix has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, 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 Imgix” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Imgix | Found at Imgix, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cloudinarycloudinary.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cloudinary | 64/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Frontifyfrontify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Frontify | 61/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Brandfolderbrandfolder.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Brandfolder | 39/100 | 2 Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Bynderbynder.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bynder | 39/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Airair.incSee also Transparency alternatives to Air | 36/100 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| ResourceSpaceresourcespace.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ResourceSpace | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Censharecenshare.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Censhare | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Uploadcareuploadcare.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uploadcare | 30/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| WoodWing Cloudwoodwing.comSee also Transparency alternatives to WoodWing Cloud | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Filecampfilecamp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Filecamp | 23/100 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Tenovostenovos.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tenovos | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Massetgetmasset.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Masset | 43/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 1 Data processing agreement | 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.