Transparency alternatives to Fathom
Other Sales engagement vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Fathom. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 55 that differ from Fathom on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Fathom has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Fathom” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Fathom | Found at Fathom, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lushalusha.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Lusha | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 Data location stated | Compare |
| Mixmaxmixmax.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mixmax | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Clearbitclearbit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clearbit | 65/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| Showpadshowpad.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Showpad | 65/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | Compare |
| Mindticklemindtickle.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mindtickle | 43/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Scratchpadscratchpad.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scratchpad | 61/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Revenue.iorevenue.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Revenue.io | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Clariclari.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clari | 43/100 | 3 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Gonggong.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Gong | 43/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| lemlistlemlist.comSee also Transparency alternatives to lemlist | 43/100 | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Outreachoutreach.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Outreach | 39/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | Compare |
| ZoomInfozoominfo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ZoomInfo | 73/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Public pricing | 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.