Transparency alternatives to YOOBIC
Other Retail operations vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at YOOBIC. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 46 that differ from YOOBIC on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
YOOBIC has 4 gaps in what we could measure: Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at YOOBIC” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at YOOBIC | Found at YOOBIC, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MangoAppsmangoapps.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MangoApps | 70/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Repslyrepsly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Repsly | 65/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Firstupfirstup.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Firstup | 61/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Simpplrsimpplr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Simpplr | 61/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Haiilohaiilo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Haiilo | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 | Compare |
| Legionlegion.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Legion | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Aurorauror.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Auror | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | Compare |
| Flipgetflip.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Flip | 30/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 | Compare |
| Jostlejostle.meSee also Transparency alternatives to Jostle | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | Compare |
| Staffbasestaffbase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Staffbase | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | Compare |
| V-Countv-count.comSee also Transparency alternatives to V-Count | 26/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | Compare |
| Omniaomniaintranet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Omnia | 17/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +5 | 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.