Transparency alternatives to Replenit
Other Marketing automation vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Replenit does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from Replenit on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Replenit 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 “publishes and Replenit does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Replenit does not | Replenit publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keapkeap.com | 61/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| GetResponsegetresponse.com | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Bloomreachbloomreach.com | 43/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Customerlycustomerly.io | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Airshipairship.com | 52/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Insider Oneinsiderone.com | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Loopsloops.so | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Mappmapp.com | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| CleverTapclevertap.com | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Postscriptpostscript.io | 56/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Verogetvero.com | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Beehiivbeehiiv.com | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Certifications named, 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.