Transparency alternatives to Fergus
Other Field service management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Fergus. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 56 that differ from Fergus on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Fergus has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Fergus” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Fergus | Found at Fergus, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ServiceTitanservicetitan.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ServiceTitan | 30/100 | 5 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| ServiceM8servicem8.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ServiceM8 | 48/100 | 4 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Praxedopraxedo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Praxedo | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| ServicePowerservicepower.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ServicePower | 26/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| Fulcrumfulcrumapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fulcrum | 45/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| FieldEdgefieldedge.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FieldEdge | 36/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Jobbergetjobber.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jobber | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Payacapayaca.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Payaca | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Uptickuptickhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uptick | 30/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Arezarez.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Arez | 26/100 | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Fieldpointfieldpoint.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Fieldpoint | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| Aspireyouraspire.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Aspire | 22/100 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | 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.