Transparency alternatives to HedgeDoc
Other Document collaboration vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at HedgeDoc. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from HedgeDoc on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
HedgeDoc has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at HedgeDoc” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at HedgeDoc | Found at HedgeDoc, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FigJamfigma.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FigJam | 87/100 | 9 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +6 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Preziprezi.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Prezi | 73/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +4 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Createlycreately.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Creately | 70/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Pitchpitch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pitch | 61/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Stormboardstormboard.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Stormboard | 52/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| MindMeistermindmeister.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MindMeister | 43/100 | 5 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Conceptboardconceptboard.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Conceptboard | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Lucidchartlucid.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Lucidchart | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Muralmural.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Mural | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Beautiful.aibeautiful.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Beautiful.ai | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Whimsicalwhimsical.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Whimsical | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cacoonulab.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cacoo | 35/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 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.