SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to ShareCredentials

Other Document management vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that ShareCredentials does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 59 that differ from ShareCredentials on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

ShareCredentials has 11 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. The column “publishes and ShareCredentials does not” is the one that closes them.

VendorScorePublishes, and ShareCredentials does notShareCredentials publishes, and they do not
Templafytemplafy.com 74/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 1 Named privacy contact Compare
CloudFilescloudfiles.io 70/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 nothing Compare
Intralinksintralinks.com 70/100 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 nothing Compare
Smallpdfsmallpdf.com 57/100 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 nothing Compare
Laserfichelaserfiche.com 52/100 6 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 nothing Compare
Onehubonehub.com 57/100 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 nothing Compare
DynaFiledynafile.com 43/100 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Papermarkpapermark.com 43/100 5 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Folderitfolderit.com 43/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 nothing Compare
PaperOfficepaperoffice.com 39/100 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 nothing Compare
Ademeroademero.com 35/100 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 nothing Compare
Fabasoftfabasoft.com 35/100 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 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.