Transparency alternatives to Nameshield
Other Patent and trademark management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Nameshield. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 28 that differ from Nameshield on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Nameshield 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, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Nameshield” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Nameshield | Found at Nameshield, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PatSnappatsnap.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PatSnap | 52/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| IPRallyiprally.comSee also Transparency alternatives to IPRally | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Wellspringwellspring.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Wellspring | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Doppeldoppel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Doppel | 50/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
| PatentBotspatentbots.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PatentBots | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Amplifiedamplified.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Amplified | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| TechInsightstechinsights.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TechInsights | 32/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| Corsearchcorsearch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Corsearch | 26/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| EBRANDebrand.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EBRAND | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Questelquestel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Questel | 22/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Relecurarelecura.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Relecura | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Red Pointsredpoints.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Red Points | 13/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.