Transparency alternatives to Slido
Other Event management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Slido. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 49 that differ from Slido on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Slido has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Slido” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Slido | Found at Slido, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stovastova.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Stova | 78/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Mentimetermentimeter.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mentimeter | 65/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| EventWorksgeteventworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EventWorks | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Bizzabobizzabo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bizzabo | 61/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Crowdcastcrowdcast.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Crowdcast | 57/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Fourwavesfourwaves.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fourwaves | 48/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Eventzillaeventzilla.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Eventzilla | 43/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Zuddlzuddl.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zuddl | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| SpeechWirespeechwire.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SpeechWire | 30/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, No third-party tracking before consent | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| BigMarkerbigmarker.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BigMarker | 26/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Acceleventsaccelevents.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Accelevents | 39/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Timely Eventstime.lySee also Transparency alternatives to Timely Events | 32/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named | 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.