SaaS Ranking

Alternatives to Biohost

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

12 shown of 22 that differ from Biohost on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Biohost has 9 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, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “publishes and Biohost does not” is the one that closes them.

VendorScorePublishes, and Biohost does notBiohost publishes, and they do not
Stalwartstalw.art 39/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Gandigandi.net 30/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Yandex 360yandex.com 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Fastmailfastmail.com 30/100 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Hushmailhushmail.com 30/100 2 Data location stated, Public pricing 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Migadumigadu.com 30/100 2 Status page with history, Public pricing 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
df.eudf.eu 26/100 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Grommuniogrommunio.com 22/100 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact Compare
OVH Mailovh.com 19/100 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
mailbox.orgmailbox.org 22/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Stratostrato.de 17/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Infomaniakinfomaniak.com 13/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact 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.