Transparency alternatives to Ora
Other Project management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Ora. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 75 that differ from Ora on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Ora has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Ora” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Ora | Found at Ora, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Airtableairtable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Airtable | 91/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Smartsheetsmartsheet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smartsheet | 91/100 | 4 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Linearlinear.appSee also Transparency alternatives to Linear | 70/100 | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Miromiro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Miro | 70/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Teamworkteamwork.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Teamwork | 57/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| BigTimebigtime.netSee also Transparency alternatives to BigTime | 52/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 4 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Stackfieldstackfield.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Stackfield | 52/100 | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Asanaasana.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Asana | 48/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Niftyniftypm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nifty | 43/100 | 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Trellotrello.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Trello | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 | Compare |
| monday.commonday.comSee also Transparency alternatives to monday.com | 74/100 | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Breezebreeze.pmSee also Transparency alternatives to Breeze | 61/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, 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.