SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Checkly

Other Monitoring and observability vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Checkly. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 45 that differ from Checkly on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Checkly has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Checkly” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at ChecklyFound at Checkly, not found there
Sentrysentry.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sentry 74/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Honeycombhoneycomb.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Honeycomb 70/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
New Relicnewrelic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to New Relic 57/100 4 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
OpenObserveopenobserve.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to OpenObserve 70/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Data location stated Compare
Pulseticpulsetic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsetic 65/100 3 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Rollbarrollbar.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rollbar 64/100 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Datadogdatadoghq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datadog 61/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Sumo Logicsumologic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sumo Logic 57/100 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Chronospherechronosphere.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Chronosphere 35/100 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 Compare
Better Stackbetterstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Better Stack 57/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
UptimeRobotuptimerobot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UptimeRobot 57/100 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
OneUptimeoneuptime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OneUptime 52/100 2 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 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.