Transparency alternatives to WatchGuard
Other Network monitoring vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at WatchGuard. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from WatchGuard on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
WatchGuard has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at WatchGuard” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at WatchGuard | Found at WatchGuard, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kentikkentik.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kentik | 70/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| LogicMonitorlogicmonitor.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LogicMonitor | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Auvikauvik.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Auvik | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Zscalerzscaler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zscaler | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Paesslerpaessler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Paessler | 43/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Catchpointcatchpoint.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Catchpoint | 39/100 | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Aristaarista.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Arista | 13/100 | 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| Cambiumcambiumnetworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cambium | 26/100 | 1 Certifications named | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Nagiosnagios.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nagios | 26/100 | 1 Public pricing | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Palo Alto Networkspaloaltonetworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Palo Alto Networks | 26/100 | 1 Certifications named | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| TP-Link Omadatp-link.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TP-Link Omada | 22/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Obkioobkio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Obkio | 17/100 | 1 Public pricing | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +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.