Transparency alternatives to OneUptime
Other Monitoring and observability vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at OneUptime. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 46 that differ from OneUptime on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
OneUptime has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at OneUptime” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at OneUptime | Found at OneUptime, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rollbarrollbar.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rollbar | 73/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Sumo Logicsumologic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sumo Logic | 70/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Pulseticpulsetic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsetic | 65/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| New Relicnewrelic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to New Relic | 57/100 | 4 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Pydanticpydantic.devSee also Transparency alternatives to Pydantic | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +1 | Compare |
| Datadogdatadoghq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datadog | 74/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Sentrysentry.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sentry | 74/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Honeycombhoneycomb.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Honeycomb | 70/100 | 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Better Stackbetterstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Better Stack | 57/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| UptimeRobotuptimerobot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UptimeRobot | 57/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Metorometoro.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Metoro | 52/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Netdatanetdata.cloudSee also Transparency alternatives to Netdata | 52/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list | 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.