Transparency alternatives to Kustomer
Other Helpdesk vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Kustomer. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 50 that differ from Kustomer on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Kustomer has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Kustomer” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Kustomer | Found at Kustomer, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BoldDeskbolddesk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BoldDesk | 74/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Desk365desk365.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Desk365 | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Deskprodeskpro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Deskpro | 70/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Intercomintercom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intercom | 70/100 | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Frontfront.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Front | 52/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Gorgiasgorgias.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gorgias | 50/100 | 3 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Crispcrisp.chatSee also Transparency alternatives to Crisp | 43/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | Compare |
| Dragdragapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Drag | 43/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Deskudesku.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Desku | 35/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| Enchantenchant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Enchant | 35/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| Zendeskzendesk.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zendesk | 35/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Dixadixa.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dixa | 61/100 | 2 Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Status page with history | 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.