Transparency alternatives to Pactum
Other Procurement vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Pactum. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 38 that differ from Pactum on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Pactum has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, 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 Pactum” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Pactum | Found at Pactum, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keelvarkeelvar.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Keelvar | 70/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Procurifyprocurify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Procurify | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Onventisonventis.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Onventis | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Zipziphq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zip | 39/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Compleat Softwarecompleatsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Compleat Software | 26/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Precoroprecoro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Precoro | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Yordexyordex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Yordex | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Mediusmedius.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Medius | 30/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Weprocweproc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Weproc | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Archletarchlet.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Archlet | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Levelpathlevelpath.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Levelpath | 13/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Turbineturbinehq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Turbine | 30/100 | 1 Data location stated | 2 Certifications named, 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.