Transparency alternatives to Hyperping
Other Incident management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Hyperping. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 33 that differ from Hyperping on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Hyperping has 4 gaps in what we could measure: Status page with history, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Hyperping” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Hyperping | Found at Hyperping, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rootlyrootly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rootly | 48/100 | 3 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| Moogsoftmoogsoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Moogsoft | 61/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| OhDearohdear.appSee also Transparency alternatives to OhDear | 61/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Causelycausely.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Causely | 35/100 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +2 | Compare |
| incident.ioincident.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to incident.io | 65/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Resolveresolve.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Resolve | 57/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| BigPandabigpanda.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to BigPanda | 48/100 | 1 Status page with history | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Uptime.comuptime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uptime.com | 48/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| AlertOpsalertops.comSee also Transparency alternatives to AlertOps | 43/100 | 1 Status page with history | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| ilertilert.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ilert | 43/100 | 1 Status page with history | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| PagerDutypagerduty.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PagerDuty | 39/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Status.iostatus.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Status.io | 35/100 | 1 Status page with history | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 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.