Transparency alternatives to Level
Other Endpoint management and security vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Level. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 37 that differ from Level on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Level has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Level” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Level | Found at Level, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Addigyaddigy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Addigy | 87/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Malwarebytesmalwarebytes.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Malwarebytes | 83/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Automoxautomox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Automox | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Hexnodehexnode.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hexnode | 62/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Esperesper.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Esper | 52/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| NinjaOneninjaone.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NinjaOne | 52/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| SentinelOnesentinelone.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SentinelOne | 48/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | Compare |
| Iruiru.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Iru | 30/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| PDQ Connectpdq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PDQ Connect | 30/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Miradoremiradore.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Miradore | 26/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | Compare |
| Trustonictrustonic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Trustonic | 13/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 7 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Action1action1.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Action1 | 48/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 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.