Transparency alternatives to Feedzai
Other Fraud prevention and identity vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Feedzai. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 47 that differ from Feedzai on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Feedzai has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent. The column “Found there, not found at Feedzai” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Feedzai | Found at Feedzai, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IDnowidnow.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to IDnow | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Vouchedvouched.idSee also Transparency alternatives to Vouched | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Alloyalloy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Alloy | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Socuresocure.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Socure | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| iDenfyidenfy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to iDenfy | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | 4 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Veriffveriff.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Veriff | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Yotiyoti.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Yoti | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 4 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| PXL Visionpxl-vision.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PXL Vision | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Sumsubsumsub.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sumsub | 37/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| InScope-AMLinscope-aml.comSee also Transparency alternatives to InScope-AML | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Signifydsignifyd.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Signifyd | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| hCaptchahcaptcha.comSee also Transparency alternatives to hCaptcha | 33/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 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.