Transparency alternatives to PowerDMARC
Other Email security vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at PowerDMARC. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 37 that differ from PowerDMARC on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
PowerDMARC has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at PowerDMARC” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at PowerDMARC | Found at PowerDMARC, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riottryriot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Riot | 65/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Red Siftredsift.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Red Sift | 83/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| URIportsuriports.comSee also Transparency alternatives to URIports | 70/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| SoSafesosafe-awareness.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SoSafe | 65/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| MailRoutemailroute.netSee also Transparency alternatives to MailRoute | 61/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Abnormalabnormalsecurity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Abnormal | 52/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Pauboxpaubox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Paubox | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| KnowBe4knowbe4.comSee also Transparency alternatives to KnowBe4 | 39/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Hoxhunthoxhunt.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hoxhunt | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | nothing | Compare |
| Retarusretarus.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Retarus | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Darktracedarktrace.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Darktrace | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| dmarciandmarcian.comSee also Transparency alternatives to dmarcian | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, 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.