Transparency alternatives to Youtrust
Other E-signature vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Youtrust. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 28 that differ from Youtrust on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Youtrust has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent. The column “Found there, not found at Youtrust” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Youtrust | Found at Youtrust, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BoldSignboldsign.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BoldSign | 83/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| SignEasysigneasy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SignEasy | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| GetAcceptgetaccept.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GetAccept | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Penneopenneo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Penneo | 52/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Dropbox Signdropbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dropbox Sign | 48/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Nitrogonitro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nitro | 48/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| SignWellsignwell.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SignWell | 43/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Scrivescrive.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scrive | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Signaturitsignaturit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Signaturit | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | Compare |
| eSignlyesignly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to eSignly | 26/100 | 3 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | Compare |
| Namirialnamirial.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Namirial | 26/100 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | Compare |
| FP Signfp-sign.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FP Sign | 22/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 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.