SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Felt

Other GIS and mapping vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Felt. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 52 that differ from Felt on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Felt has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, 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 Felt” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at FeltFound at Felt, not found there
Mapboxmapbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mapbox 61/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 1 Data location stated Compare
Bentley Systemsbentley.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bentley Systems 43/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named Compare
LightBoxlightboxre.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LightBox 48/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 Compare
GIS Cloudgiscloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GIS Cloud 55/100 2 Subprocessor list, No third-party tracking before consent 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Safe Software FMEsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Safe Software FME 52/100 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history 1 Public pricing Compare
Planetplanet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Planet 48/100 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Data location stated Compare
MetaLocatormetalocator.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MetaLocator 38/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
CARTOcarto.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CARTO 35/100 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Named privacy contact Compare
Geoapifygeoapify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Geoapify 30/100 2 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 Compare
Nearmapnearmap.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nearmap 22/100 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 Compare
Pointlypointly.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Pointly 39/100 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Certifications named Compare
Foursquarefoursquare.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Foursquare 30/100 1 Status page with history 2 Data location stated, Certifications named 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.