Transparency alternatives to Linear
Other Project management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Linear. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 77 that differ from Linear on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Linear has 4 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Linear” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Linear | Found at Linear, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Airtableairtable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Airtable | 91/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Smartsheetsmartsheet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smartsheet | 91/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Miromiro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Miro | 70/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| monday.commonday.comSee also Transparency alternatives to monday.com | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| BigTimebigtime.netSee also Transparency alternatives to BigTime | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 5 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, +2 | Compare |
| Oraora.pmSee also Transparency alternatives to Ora | 70/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Plutioplutio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Plutio | 70/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Teamworkteamwork.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Teamwork | 57/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Hivehive.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hive | 48/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Aha!aha.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Aha! | 43/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Status page with history | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +2 | Compare |
| Niftyniftypm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nifty | 43/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Trellotrello.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Trello | 39/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +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.