Transparency alternatives to Tulip
Other Manufacturing execution vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Tulip. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 47 that differ from Tulip on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Tulip has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Tulip” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Tulip | Found at Tulip, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dozukidozuki.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dozuki | 52/100 | 4 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Reverreverscore.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rever | 26/100 | 4 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Ams Erpams-erp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ams Erp | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Forcam Eniscoforcam-enisco.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Forcam Enisco | 26/100 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Simussimus-systems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Simus | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| ECI Solutionsecisolutions.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ECI Solutions | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Inforinfor.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Infor | 13/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Evoconevocon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Evocon | 26/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Scytec DataXchangescytec.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scytec DataXchange | 26/100 | 1 Data location stated | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Abasabas-erp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Abas | 17/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Asset Scienceassetscience.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Asset Science | 17/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| BRAINRbrainr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BRAINR | 17/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 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.