Transparency alternatives to PatSnap
Other Patent and trademark management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at PatSnap. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 28 that differ from PatSnap on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
PatSnap has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at PatSnap” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at PatSnap | Found at PatSnap, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doppeldoppel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Doppel | 50/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| IPRallyiprally.comSee also Transparency alternatives to IPRally | 48/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| PatentBotspatentbots.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PatentBots | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Questelquestel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Questel | 22/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 7 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Wellspringwellspring.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Wellspring | 48/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Amplifiedamplified.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Amplified | 43/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| TechInsightstechinsights.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TechInsights | 32/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Corsearchcorsearch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Corsearch | 26/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| EBRANDebrand.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EBRAND | 26/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Relecurarelecura.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Relecura | 22/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| Inteuminteum.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Inteum | 17/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| IPzenipzen.comSee also Transparency alternatives to IPzen | 17/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +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.