Transparency alternatives to TIS GmbH
Other Route planning and delivery vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at TIS GmbH. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 64 that differ from TIS GmbH on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
TIS GmbH has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at TIS GmbH” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at TIS GmbH | Found at TIS GmbH, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NextBillion.ainextbillion.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to NextBillion.ai | 48/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| RideCorideco.comSee also Transparency alternatives to RideCo | 52/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Tookanjungleworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tookan | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Lytxlytx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Lytx | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Netradynenetradyne.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Netradyne | 43/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Navixynavixy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Navixy | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +1 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Routificroutific.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Routific | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| One Step GPSonestepgps.comSee also Transparency alternatives to One Step GPS | 35/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Routalroutal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Routal | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| Avriosavrios.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Avrios | 30/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Detrackdetrack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Detrack | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| FTS GPSftsgps.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FTS GPS | 30/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, 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.