SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Smarsh

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

12 shown of 38 that differ from Smarsh on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Smarsh has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, 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). The column “Found there, not found at Smarsh” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at SmarshFound at Smarsh, not found there
Everlaweverlaw.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Everlaw 30/100 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
DISCOcsdisco.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DISCO 52/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 1 Data location stated Compare
Jatheonjatheon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jatheon 45/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Mailbutlermailbutler.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Mailbutler 43/100 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Magnet Forensicsmagnetforensics.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Magnet Forensics 39/100 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Shieldshieldfc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Shield 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
Nuixnuix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nuix 26/100 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Digital WarRoomdigitalwarroom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Digital WarRoom 24/100 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 Compare
Behavoxbehavox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Behavox 22/100 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 Compare
CloudNinecloudnine.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CloudNine 22/100 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 Compare
Hanzohanzo.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Hanzo 39/100 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure 1 Notice before subprocessors change Compare
GoldFynchgoldfynch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GoldFynch 35/100 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 Subprocessor list, 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.