Transparency alternatives to Chronosphere
Other Monitoring and observability vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Chronosphere. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 45 that differ from Chronosphere on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Chronosphere has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Chronosphere” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Chronosphere | Found at Chronosphere, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sentrysentry.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sentry | 74/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Pulseticpulsetic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsetic | 65/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Coralogixcoralogix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Coralogix | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 4 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Honeycombhoneycomb.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Honeycomb | 70/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| OpenObserveopenobserve.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to OpenObserve | 70/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Datadogdatadoghq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datadog | 61/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Better Stackbetterstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Better Stack | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| New Relicnewrelic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to New Relic | 57/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| UptimeRobotuptimerobot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UptimeRobot | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Netdatanetdata.cloudSee also Transparency alternatives to Netdata | 52/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Checklychecklyhq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Checkly | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| OnlineOrNotonlineornot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OnlineOrNot | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +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.