Transparency alternatives to Ai Multiple
Other Robotic process automation vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Ai Multiple. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 24 that differ from Ai Multiple on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Ai Multiple has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Ai Multiple” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Ai Multiple | Found at Ai Multiple, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uniphoreuniphore.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uniphore | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +2 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Robomotionrobomotion.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Robomotion | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Hypersciencehyperscience.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hyperscience | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Netcallnetcall.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Netcall | 35/100 | 2 Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Redwoodredwood.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Redwood | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Electroneekelectroneek.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Electroneek | 10/100 | 2 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Datamaticsdatamatics.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datamatics | 26/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Automation Heroautomationhero.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Automation Hero | 22/100 | 1 Public pricing | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Sema4.aisema4.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Sema4.ai | 18/100 | 1 Status page with history | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Blue Prismblueprism.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Blue Prism | 13/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Laiyelaiye.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Laiye | 13/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 2 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Ipsoftipsoft.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ipsoft | 4/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 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.