Transparency alternatives to OneCrowd
Other Equity and cap table management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at OneCrowd. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 27 that differ from OneCrowd on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
OneCrowd 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 OneCrowd” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at OneCrowd | Found at OneCrowd, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cartacarta.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Carta | 70/100 | 8 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +5 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cake Equitycakeequity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cake Equity | 35/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Hiivehiive.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hiive | 30/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Sydecarsydecar.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sydecar | 26/100 | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Bunchbunch.capitalSee also Transparency alternatives to Bunch | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Companistocompanisto.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Companisto | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Fairmintfairmint.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fairmint | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Ledgyledgy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ledgy | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Pulleypulley.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulley | 22/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Qapitaqapita.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Qapita | 22/100 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Corporifycorporify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Corporify | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Allocationsallocations.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Allocations | 17/100 | 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 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.