Transparency alternatives to Netdata
Other Monitoring and observability vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Netdata. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 45 that differ from Netdata on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Netdata has 5 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. The column “Found there, not found at Netdata” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Netdata | Found at Netdata, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sentrysentry.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sentry | 74/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Honeycombhoneycomb.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Honeycomb | 70/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, 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 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| New Relicnewrelic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to New Relic | 57/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Pulseticpulsetic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsetic | 65/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Rollbarrollbar.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rollbar | 64/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Datadogdatadoghq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datadog | 61/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Better Stackbetterstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Better Stack | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Sumo Logicsumologic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sumo Logic | 57/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| UptimeRobotuptimerobot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UptimeRobot | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| OneUptimeoneuptime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OneUptime | 52/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Parseableparseable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Parseable | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 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.