Transparency alternatives to Navori
Other Digital signage vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Navori. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 54 that differ from Navori on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Navori has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, 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 Navori” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Navori | Found at Navori, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ScreenCloudscreencloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ScreenCloud | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Yodeckyodeck.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Yodeck | 65/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Appspaceappspace.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Appspace | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Poppulopoppulo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Poppulo | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | Compare |
| Xiboxibo.org.ukSee also Transparency alternatives to Xibo | 48/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Broadsignbroadsign.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Broadsign | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| Pickcelpickcel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pickcel | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Play Digital Signageplaysignage.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Play Digital Signage | 43/100 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Wallboardwallboard.infoSee also Transparency alternatives to Wallboard | 39/100 | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Onsignonsign.tvSee also Transparency alternatives to Onsign | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Screenlyscreenly.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Screenly | 26/100 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Netpresenternetpresenter.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Netpresenter | 13/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 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.