Transparency alternatives to HiPeople
Other Recruiting assessment vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at HiPeople. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 43 that differ from HiPeople on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
HiPeople has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at HiPeople” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at HiPeople | Found at HiPeople, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TestGorillatestgorilla.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TestGorilla | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, Certifications named | Compare |
| Toggl Hiretoggl.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Toggl Hire | 52/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, Certifications named | Compare |
| Adafaceadaface.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Adaface | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| CodeSignalcodesignal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CodeSignal | 48/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, Certifications named | Compare |
| HireVuehirevue.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HireVue | 43/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Bryqbryq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bryq | 70/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Predictive Indexpredictiveindex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Predictive Index | 48/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Criteriacriteriacorp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Criteria | 43/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Qualifiedqualified.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Qualified | 48/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| CoderPadcoderpad.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CoderPad | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Subprocessor list | Compare |
| Codilitycodility.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Codility | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 1 Subprocessor list | Compare |
| Traitifytraitify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Traitify | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Subprocessor list, 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.