Transparency alternatives to N2F
Other Expense management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at N2F. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 30 that differ from N2F on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
N2F has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at N2F” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at N2F | Found at N2F, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brexbrex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Brex | 70/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Payhawkpayhawk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Payhawk | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Klippaklippa.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Klippa | 52/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Rydoorydoo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rydoo | 52/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Emburseemburse.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Emburse | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Spendeskspendesk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Spendesk | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Navannavan.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Navan | 48/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
| ExpenseInexpensein.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ExpenseIn | 43/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Tipaltitipalti.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tipalti | 48/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Data location stated | nothing | Compare |
| Expensifyexpensify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Expensify | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | nothing | Compare |
| Rampramp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ramp | 26/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Pleopleo.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Pleo | 27/100 | 1 Status page with history | 1 Named privacy contact | 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.