Transparency alternatives to Sematext
Other Monitoring and observability vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Sematext. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 45 that differ from Sematext on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Sematext has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Sematext” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Sematext | Found at Sematext, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sentrysentry.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Sentry | 74/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Honeycombhoneycomb.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Honeycomb | 70/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| OpenObserveopenobserve.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to OpenObserve | 70/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Pulseticpulsetic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsetic | 65/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Rollbarrollbar.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rollbar | 64/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Datadogdatadoghq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datadog | 61/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| New Relicnewrelic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to New Relic | 57/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Sumo Logicsumologic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sumo Logic | 57/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Better Stackbetterstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Better Stack | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Coralogixcoralogix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Coralogix | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| UptimeRobotuptimerobot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UptimeRobot | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Netdatanetdata.cloudSee also Transparency alternatives to Netdata | 52/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 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.