SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Retarus

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

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

Retarus has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Retarus” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at RetarusFound at Retarus, not found there
Red Siftredsift.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Red Sift 83/100 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
MailRoutemailroute.netSee also Transparency alternatives to MailRoute 61/100 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Riottryriot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Riot 65/100 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
SoSafesosafe-awareness.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SoSafe 65/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +1 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Hoxhunthoxhunt.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hoxhunt 61/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +1 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Abnormalabnormalsecurity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Abnormal 52/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
KnowBe4knowbe4.comSee also Transparency alternatives to KnowBe4 39/100 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
dmarciandmarcian.comSee also Transparency alternatives to dmarcian 35/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 5 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 Compare
URIportsuriports.comSee also Transparency alternatives to URIports 70/100 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change nothing Compare
Pauboxpaubox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Paubox 48/100 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Named privacy contact 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Cofensecofense.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cofense 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 4 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 Compare
Valimailvalimail.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Valimail 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Named privacy contact 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) 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.