Transparency alternatives to Voyage AI
Other Search and vector infrastructure vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Voyage AI. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 39 that differ from Voyage AI on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Voyage AI has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Voyage AI” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Voyage AI | Found at Voyage AI, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chromatrychroma.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Chroma | 74/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Pineconepinecone.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Pinecone | 70/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Dashworksdashworks.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Dashworks | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| turbopufferturbopuffer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to turbopuffer | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Valyuvalyu.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Valyu | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Zillizzilliz.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zilliz | 22/100 | 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Parallelparallel.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Parallel | 61/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Hebbiahebbia.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Hebbia | 52/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Coveocoveo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Coveo | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Gleanglean.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Glean | 39/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Status page with history | Compare |
| Cludocludo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cludo | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Vespavespa.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Vespa | 35/100 | 3 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change | 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.