SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Trimble Geospatial

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

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

Trimble Geospatial has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, 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 Trimble Geospatial” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at Trimble GeospatialFound at Trimble Geospatial, not found there
Mapboxmapbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mapbox 74/100 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 nothing Compare
LightBoxlightboxre.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LightBox 57/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact Compare
GIS Cloudgiscloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GIS Cloud 55/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Planetplanet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Planet 52/100 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change nothing Compare
Safe Software FMEsafe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Safe Software FME 52/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history nothing Compare
Alteryx Spatialalteryx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Alteryx Spatial 39/100 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Bentley Systemsbentley.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bentley Systems 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Certifications named Compare
NextGISnextgis.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NextGIS 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact Compare
Pointlypointly.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Pointly 39/100 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Certifications named Compare
CARTOcarto.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CARTO 35/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact Compare
MetaLocatormetalocator.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MetaLocator 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Nearmapnearmap.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nearmap 35/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact 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.