Transparency alternatives to Conceptboard
Other Document collaboration vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Conceptboard. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 36 that differ from Conceptboard on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Conceptboard has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Conceptboard” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Conceptboard | Found at Conceptboard, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FigJamfigma.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FigJam | 87/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Preziprezi.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Prezi | 73/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Createlycreately.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Creately | 70/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Pitchpitch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pitch | 61/100 | 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cacoonulab.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cacoo | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Stormboardstormboard.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Stormboard | 52/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Public pricing | 2 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Lucidchartlucid.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Lucidchart | 43/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| MindMeistermindmeister.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MindMeister | 43/100 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Muralmural.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Mural | 43/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Gliffygliffy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gliffy | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Taskadetaskade.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Taskade | 26/100 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | Compare |
| OnlyOfficeonlyoffice.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OnlyOffice | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 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.