Transparency alternatives to Pointly
Other GIS and mapping vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Pointly. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 51 that differ from Pointly on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Pointly has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Pointly” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Pointly | Found at Pointly, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mapboxmapbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mapbox | 74/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| LightBoxlightboxre.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LightBox | 57/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| GIS Cloudgiscloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GIS Cloud | 55/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Planetplanet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Planet | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Safe Software FMEsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Safe Software FME | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Bentley Systemsbentley.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bentley Systems | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | Compare |
| NextGISnextgis.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NextGIS | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| MetaLocatormetalocator.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MetaLocator | 35/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Nearmapnearmap.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nearmap | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), 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, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Ascent Cloudascentcloud.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Ascent Cloud | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Mapmemapme.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mapme | 22/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 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.