SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to e-Docs ScanQuire

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

12 shown of 52 that differ from e-Docs ScanQuire on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

e-Docs ScanQuire has 12 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, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at e-Docs ScanQuire” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at e-Docs ScanQuireFound at e-Docs ScanQuire, not found there
Templafytemplafy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Templafy 74/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 nothing Compare
CloudFilescloudfiles.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudFiles 70/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 nothing Compare
Intralinksintralinks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intralinks 70/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 nothing Compare
Smallpdfsmallpdf.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smallpdf 57/100 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +4 nothing Compare
Laserfichelaserfiche.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Laserfiche 52/100 7 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 nothing Compare
Onehubonehub.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Onehub 57/100 6 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 nothing Compare
DynaFiledynafile.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DynaFile 43/100 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Folderitfolderit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Folderit 43/100 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 nothing Compare
Papermarkpapermark.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Papermark 43/100 5 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
PaperOfficepaperoffice.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PaperOffice 39/100 5 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Ademeroademero.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ademero 35/100 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 nothing Compare
Fabasoftfabasoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fabasoft 35/100 5 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 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.