Alternatives to ntfy
Other Push and realtime messaging vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that ntfy does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
7 shown of 7 that differ from ntfy on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
ntfy has 12 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “publishes and ntfy does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and ntfy does not | ntfy publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PushEngagepushengage.com | 52/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| Pushoverpushover.net | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Pusherpusher.com | 26/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| PushAlertpushalert.co | 17/100 | 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| Pushsaferpushsafer.com | 17/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| Webpushrwebpushr.com | 17/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | nothing | Compare |
| WonderPushwonderpush.com | 9/100 | 1 Public pricing | nothing | 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.