SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Francotyp-Postalia

Other Print and packaging software vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Francotyp-Postalia. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 44 that differ from Francotyp-Postalia on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Francotyp-Postalia has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Francotyp-Postalia” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at Francotyp-PostaliaFound at Francotyp-Postalia, not found there
Threekitthreekit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Threekit 30/100 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Smart Communicationssmartcommunications.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smart Communications 26/100 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
3DPrinterOS3dprinteros.comSee also Transparency alternatives to 3DPrinterOS 30/100 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Customilycustomily.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Customily 30/100 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
SEAL Systemssealsystems.deSee also Transparency alternatives to SEAL Systems 30/100 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 No third-party tracking before consent Compare
WilcomWorkspacewilcom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to WilcomWorkspace 30/100 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Teesomteesom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Teesom 27/100 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
Kickflipgokickflip.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kickflip 18/100 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Onlineprintersonlineprinters.deSee also Transparency alternatives to Onlineprinters 17/100 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Pitney Bowespitneybowes.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pitney Bowes 17/100 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact Compare
Vistaprint Partnercimpress.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vistaprint Partner 17/100 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Compliscomplis.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Complis 13/100 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact 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.