SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Caspio

Other Low-code and internal tools vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Caspio. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 46 that differ from Caspio on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Caspio has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Caspio” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at CaspioFound at Caspio, not found there
Retoolretool.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Retool 61/100 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Forest Adminforestadmin.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Forest Admin 57/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Mendixmendix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mendix 52/100 4 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Pegapega.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pega 52/100 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Superblockssuperblocks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Superblocks 52/100 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Betty Blocksbettyblocks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Betty Blocks 48/100 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
Budibasebudibase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Budibase 48/100 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change Compare
UI Bakeryuibakery.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to UI Bakery 43/100 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 Compare
Cognisscogniss.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cogniss 30/100 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact 5 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 Compare
Appianappian.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Appian 26/100 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 Compare
OutSystemsoutsystems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OutSystems 24/100 3 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 Compare
Jet Adminjetadmin.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Jet Admin 48/100 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent 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.