Transparency alternatives to Aspire
Other Field service management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Aspire. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 56 that differ from Aspire on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Aspire has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, 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 Aspire” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Aspire | Found at Aspire, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ServiceM8servicem8.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ServiceM8 | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Praxedopraxedo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Praxedo | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Fulcrumfulcrumapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fulcrum | 45/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Jobbergetjobber.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jobber | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Payacapayaca.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Payaca | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| FieldEdgefieldedge.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FieldEdge | 36/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Housecall Prohousecallpro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Housecall Pro | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| ServiceTitanservicetitan.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ServiceTitan | 30/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | nothing | Compare |
| Uptickuptickhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uptick | 30/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Arezarez.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Arez | 26/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Bella FSMbellafsm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bella FSM | 26/100 | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Fieldcodefieldcode.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fieldcode | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 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.