Transparency alternatives to Pinpointe
Other Email marketing vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Pinpointe. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 28 that differ from Pinpointe on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Pinpointe 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, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Pinpointe” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Pinpointe | Found at Pinpointe, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mailgunmailgun.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mailgun | 83/100 | 9 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +6 | nothing | Compare |
| Customer.iocustomer.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Customer.io | 78/100 | 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 | nothing | Compare |
| ActiveCampaignactivecampaign.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ActiveCampaign | 65/100 | 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +5 | nothing | Compare |
| Klaviyoklaviyo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Klaviyo | 65/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| Buttondownbuttondown.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Buttondown | 61/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| Omnisendomnisend.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Omnisend | 57/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| Mailchimpmailchimp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mailchimp | 57/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| CleverReachcleverreach.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CleverReach | 48/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Emailableemailable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Emailable | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Kitkit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kit | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Elastic Emailelasticemail.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Elastic Email | 43/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Postmarkpostmarkapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Postmark | 43/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 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.