SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Collavate

Other Document management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Collavate. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 61 that differ from Collavate on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Collavate has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Collavate” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at CollavateFound at Collavate, not found there
CloudFilescloudfiles.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudFiles 70/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Templafytemplafy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Templafy 74/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Intralinksintralinks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intralinks 70/100 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 1 Public pricing Compare
Smallpdfsmallpdf.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smallpdf 57/100 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 1 Public pricing Compare
Laserfichelaserfiche.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Laserfiche 52/100 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Onehubonehub.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Onehub 57/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 nothing Compare
DynaFiledynafile.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DynaFile 43/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 1 Public pricing Compare
Folderitfolderit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Folderit 43/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Fabasoftfabasoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fabasoft 35/100 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 1 Public pricing Compare
Papermarkpapermark.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Papermark 43/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change nothing Compare
Ademeroademero.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ademero 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Named privacy contact nothing Compare
PaperOfficepaperoffice.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PaperOffice 39/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact nothing 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.