Transparency alternatives to Mapbox
Other GIS and mapping vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Mapbox. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 52 that differ from Mapbox on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Mapbox has 3 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Mapbox” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Mapbox | Found at Mapbox, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bentley Systemsbentley.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bentley Systems | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | Compare |
| Geoapifygeoapify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Geoapify | 30/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent | 8 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +5 | Compare |
| LightBoxlightboxre.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LightBox | 57/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| GIS Cloudgiscloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GIS Cloud | 55/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Safe Software FMEsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Safe Software FME | 52/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Alteryx Spatialalteryx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Alteryx Spatial | 39/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| Pointlypointly.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Pointly | 39/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| MetaLocatormetalocator.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MetaLocator | 38/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | Compare |
| CARTOcarto.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CARTO | 35/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 | Compare |
| Geocortexvertigis.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Geocortex | 30/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 | Compare |
| Stadia Mapsstadiamaps.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Stadia Maps | 30/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 7 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +4 | Compare |
| Maptilermaptiler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Maptiler | 26/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | 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.