Transparency alternatives to Instatus
Other Incident management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Instatus. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 33 that differ from Instatus on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Instatus has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Instatus” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Instatus | Found at Instatus, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moogsoftmoogsoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Moogsoft | 61/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| OhDearohdear.appSee also Transparency alternatives to OhDear | 61/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Hyperpinghyperping.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Hyperping | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| incident.ioincident.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to incident.io | 65/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Rootlyrootly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rootly | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Resolveresolve.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Resolve | 57/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| Uptime.comuptime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uptime.com | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| AlertOpsalertops.comSee also Transparency alternatives to AlertOps | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| ilertilert.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ilert | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| PagerDutypagerduty.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PagerDuty | 39/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Causelycausely.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Causely | 35/100 | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Status.iostatus.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Status.io | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | 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.