SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Increase

Other Payment orchestration vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Increase. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 33 that differ from Increase on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Increase has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Increase” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at IncreaseFound at Increase, not found there
Yunoy.unoSee also Transparency alternatives to Yuno 65/100 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Rebillyrebilly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rebilly 48/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
IXOPAYixopay.comSee also Transparency alternatives to IXOPAY 45/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Unitunit.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Unit 39/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Yapilyyapily.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Yapily 26/100 3 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 Compare
Spreedlyspreedly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Spreedly 43/100 2 Data location stated, Certifications named 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Payrailspayrails.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Payrails 35/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Marqetamarqeta.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Marqeta 26/100 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Token.iotoken.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Token.io 26/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Corefycorefy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Corefy 30/100 1 Data location stated 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
TrueLayertruelayer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TrueLayer 26/100 1 Certifications named 1 Public pricing Compare
Nomupaynomupay.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nomupay 22/100 1 Named privacy contact 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 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.