Transparency alternatives to Epiance
Other Robotic process automation vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Epiance. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 23 that differ from Epiance on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Epiance has 11 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, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Epiance” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Epiance | Found at Epiance, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robomotionrobomotion.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Robomotion | 57/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Uniphoreuniphore.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Uniphore | 57/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +3 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Hypersciencehyperscience.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hyperscience | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Netcallnetcall.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Netcall | 35/100 | 4 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Datamaticsdatamatics.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Datamatics | 26/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Redwoodredwood.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Redwood | 17/100 | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Ai Multipleaimultiple.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ai Multiple | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| Automation Heroautomationhero.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Automation Hero | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| WorkFusionworkfusion.comSee also Transparency alternatives to WorkFusion | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Sema4.aisema4.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Sema4.ai | 18/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Blue Prismblueprism.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Blue Prism | 13/100 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Laiyelaiye.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Laiye | 13/100 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | 1 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.