Transparency alternatives to RUAL Core
Other Low-code and internal tools vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at RUAL Core. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 46 that differ from RUAL Core on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
RUAL Core has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at RUAL Core” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at RUAL Core | Found at RUAL Core, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest Adminforestadmin.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Forest Admin | 70/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Retoolretool.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Retool | 61/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Caspiocaspio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Caspio | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Pegapega.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pega | 52/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Teableteable.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Teable | 57/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Mendixmendix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mendix | 52/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Superblockssuperblocks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Superblocks | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Budibasebudibase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Budibase | 48/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Jet Adminjetadmin.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Jet Admin | 48/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| UI Bakeryuibakery.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to UI Bakery | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Agilebaseagilebase.co.ukSee also Transparency alternatives to Agilebase | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Betty Blocksbettyblocks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Betty Blocks | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, 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.