Transparency alternatives to Onehub
Other Document management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Onehub. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 65 that differ from Onehub on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Onehub has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Onehub” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Onehub | Found at Onehub, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Templafytemplafy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Templafy | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| CloudFilescloudfiles.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudFiles | 70/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Smallpdfsmallpdf.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smallpdf | 57/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Laserfichelaserfiche.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Laserfiche | 52/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Fabasoftfabasoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fabasoft | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Intralinksintralinks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intralinks | 70/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| DynaFiledynafile.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DynaFile | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Papermarkpapermark.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Papermark | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| PaperOfficepaperoffice.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PaperOffice | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Folderitfolderit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Folderit | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| The Drive AIthedrive.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to The Drive AI | 26/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Ademeroademero.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ademero | 39/100 | 1 Certifications named | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 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.