Transparency alternatives to Trackforce Valiant
Other Security guard workforce vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Trackforce Valiant. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 17 that differ from Trackforce Valiant on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Trackforce Valiant has 4 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Trackforce Valiant” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Trackforce Valiant | Found at Trackforce Valiant, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Onticontic.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Ontic | 61/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Belfrybelfrysoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Belfry | 26/100 | 1 Status page with history | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 | Compare |
| SecurityHivesecurityhive.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to SecurityHive | 22/100 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 | Compare |
| Connecteamconnecteam.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Connecteam | 39/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Winteamteamsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Winteam | 13/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | Compare |
| GuardsProguardspro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GuardsPro | 11/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | Compare |
| BizSchedulerbizscheduler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to BizScheduler | 9/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +4 | Compare |
| Detexdetex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Detex | 9/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Guardhouseguardhouse.com.auSee also Transparency alternatives to Guardhouse | 9/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Novagemsnovagems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Novagems | 9/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Vertxvertx.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vertx | 9/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | Compare |
| Timekeeping Systemsguard1.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Timekeeping Systems | 5/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 7 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +4 | 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.