Transparency alternatives to Mailgun
Other Email marketing vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Mailgun. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 32 that differ from Mailgun on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Mailgun has 2 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Mailgun” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Mailgun | Found at Mailgun, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buttondownbuttondown.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Buttondown | 61/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| Mailchimpmailchimp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mailchimp | 57/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +3 | Compare |
| Customer.iocustomer.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Customer.io | 78/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| ActiveCampaignactivecampaign.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ActiveCampaign | 74/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| EmailOctopusemailoctopus.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EmailOctopus | 70/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Klaviyoklaviyo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Klaviyo | 65/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 4 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | Compare |
| Omnisendomnisend.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Omnisend | 57/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| CleverReachcleverreach.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CleverReach | 48/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| Campaign Monitorcampaignmonitor.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Campaign Monitor | 19/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +4 | Compare |
| Brick Street CONNECTbrickstreetsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Brick Street CONNECT | 13/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 9 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +6 | Compare |
| Emailableemailable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Emailable | 48/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| Kitkit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kit | 48/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 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.