Transparency alternatives to VWO
Other Feature flags and experimentation vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at VWO. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 28 that differ from VWO on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
VWO has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at VWO” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at VWO | Found at VWO, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statsigstatsig.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Statsig | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Unleashgetunleash.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Unleash | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Reflagreflag.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Reflag | 61/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| GrowthBookgrowthbook.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to GrowthBook | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| LaunchDarklylaunchdarkly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LaunchDarkly | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Flagsmithflagsmith.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Flagsmith | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Harnessharness.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Harness | 48/100 | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Convertconvert.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Convert | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Midamida.soSee also Transparency alternatives to Mida | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Splitsplit.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Split | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Kameleoonkameleoon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kameleoon | 35/100 | 1 Public pricing | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Kimchikimchi.devSee also Transparency alternatives to Kimchi | 35/100 | 1 Public pricing | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), 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.