Transparency alternatives to MasterControl
Other Quality management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at MasterControl. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 85 that differ from MasterControl on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
MasterControl has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at MasterControl” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at MasterControl | Found at MasterControl, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qualioqualio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Qualio | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| SimplerQMSsimplerqms.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SimplerQMS | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Ketryxketryx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ketryx | 43/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| AM System Classicamsystem.comSee also Transparency alternatives to AM System Classic | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Grand Avenue Softwaregrandavenue.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Grand Avenue Software | 35/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Propelpropelsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Propel | 35/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Cognidoxcognidox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cognidox | 39/100 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| myoshmyosh.comSee also Transparency alternatives to myosh | 39/100 | 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| TrackWisespartasystems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TrackWise | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| SoftComplysoftcomply.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SoftComply | 26/100 | 3 Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 2 Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Greenlight Gurugreenlight.guruSee also Transparency alternatives to Greenlight Guru | 22/100 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| mySHEQmysheq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to mySHEQ | 22/100 | 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 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.