Transparency alternatives to Woodpecker
Other Sales engagement vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Woodpecker. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 55 that differ from Woodpecker on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Woodpecker has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Woodpecker” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Woodpecker | Found at Woodpecker, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clearbitclearbit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clearbit | 65/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| Mixmaxmixmax.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mixmax | 74/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Showpadshowpad.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Showpad | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Yeswareyesware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Yesware | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Lushalusha.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Lusha | 74/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
| ZoomInfozoominfo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ZoomInfo | 73/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Hunterhunter.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Hunter | 70/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Gonggong.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Gong | 57/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Revenue.iorevenue.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Revenue.io | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Clariclari.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clari | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Outreachoutreach.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Outreach | 39/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing | Compare |
| Mindticklemindtickle.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mindtickle | 38/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 Data processing agreement, 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.