Transparency alternatives to Cognidox
Other Quality management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Cognidox. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 83 that differ from Cognidox on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Cognidox has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Cognidox” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Cognidox | Found at Cognidox, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qualioqualio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Qualio | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| AM System Classicamsystem.comSee also Transparency alternatives to AM System Classic | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| SimplerQMSsimplerqms.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SimplerQMS | 48/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| Ketryxketryx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ketryx | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Grand Avenue Softwaregrandavenue.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Grand Avenue Software | 35/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Arenaarenasolutions.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Arena | 26/100 | 2 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Castor EDCcastoredc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Castor EDC | 17/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Propelpropelsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Propel | 35/100 | 1 Status page with history | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| TrackWisespartasystems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TrackWise | 35/100 | 1 Status page with history | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| SoftComplysoftcomply.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SoftComply | 26/100 | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Durodurolabs.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Duro | 22/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Greenlight Gurugreenlight.guruSee also Transparency alternatives to Greenlight Guru | 22/100 | 1 Status page with history | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | 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.