Transparency alternatives to Dixa
Other Helpdesk vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Dixa. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 50 that differ from Dixa on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Dixa has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Dixa” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Dixa | Found at Dixa, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BoldDeskbolddesk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BoldDesk | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Deskprodeskpro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Deskpro | 70/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Gorgiasgorgias.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gorgias | 50/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Enchantenchant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Enchant | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +3 | Compare |
| Desk365desk365.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Desk365 | 74/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Certifications named | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Intercomintercom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intercom | 70/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | nothing | Compare |
| Frontfront.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Front | 52/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Hiverhiverhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hiver | 48/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Crispcrisp.chatSee also Transparency alternatives to Crisp | 43/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Dragdragapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Drag | 43/100 | 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Tidiotidio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tidio | 41/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 4 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Kayakokayako.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kayako | 39/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 4 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +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.