SaaS Ranking
Menu

Expel: what they publish

expel.com · SIEM and security operations · checked 2026-10-13

61/100CBand C

Rank 1 of 39 in SIEM and security operations, where the median is 22.

Public transparency score, not a product or security rating. Latest check: 2026-10-13. How the score works.

Evidence at a glance

Choose a check to see its source, date and scope.

Not found means not found at the addresses we checked. Not measured means we could not complete the check.

Start a vendor reviewDownload evidence (CSV)

Overview

6 days since the newest dated result, 6 since the oldest. 12 of 12 criteria have a measured result in the last 30 days. Failed checks and undated results are excluded.

Evidence freshness is a statement about our measurement and is kept apart from the transparency score, which is frozen at v1. How good our own measurement is.

Transparency labelsaas-ranking.com

Expel

expel.com · SIEM and security operations

  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
C 61of 100 Rank 1 of 39

Published commitments6 of 9 found

Measured behaviour2 of 3 found

Checked 2026-10-13. Every line links the page we found it on. A cross means we found nothing at the addresses we checked, not that the vendor has no such document. A transparency score, not a product rating.

Downloads include all checks, source URLs, dates and the snapshot ID for your procurement file. We do not issue badges.

The label is the whole measurement in one object: every criterion with its weight, the band, and the date. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Every line in it links the page we found the result on, or lists the addresses we checked. A cross means we found nothing there, not that Expel has no such document.

Where Expel sits in SIEM and security operations

  1. A0 0%
  2. B0 0%
  3. C2 5%
  4. D3 8%
  5. E13 33%
  6. F21 54%
39 vendors with a score; 3 more without a score because we could measure too little. Bands have fixed thresholds, see how the score works.

The band of Expel is marked. Vendors without a score are the ones where we could measure too few criteria to rank them – a gap on our side, counted separately.

What Expel states

The exact figures and names we read off the pages linked below, with the sentence they stand in. This is what they publish, not what we verified about their systems.

Gaps, heaviest first

✗

Subprocessors: the published list

weight 3 of 3

No subprocessor list found.

Checked 7 addresses on 2026-10-13.

Show the 7 addresses we checked
  1. https://expel.com/legal/subprocessors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  2. https://expel.com/subprocessors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  3. https://expel.com/sub-processors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  4. https://expel.com/legal/sub-processors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  5. https://expel.com/trust/subprocessors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  6. https://expel.com/privacy/subprocessors – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  7. https://expel.com/legal/subprocessor-list – reached, no match (HTTP 404)

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Subprocessor list in SIEM and security operations: 3 of 39 companies

✗

Status page with incident history

weight 2 of 3

No public status page found.

Checked 3 addresses on 2026-10-13.

Show the 3 addresses we checked
  1. https://status.expel.com/ – The name "status.expel.com" could not be resolved.
  2. https://expel.com/status – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  3. https://expel.com.statuspage.io/ – Could not be fetched: fetch failed.

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Status page with history in SIEM and security operations: 9 of 41 companies

✗

Public pricing with figures

weight 2 of 3

No public pricing with figures found.

Checked 5 addresses on 2026-10-13.

Show the 5 addresses we checked
  1. https://expel.com/pricing – reached and rendered, no match
  2. https://expel.com/pricing/ – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  3. https://expel.com/plans – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  4. https://expel.com/en/pricing – reached, no match (HTTP 404)
  5. https://expel.com/pricing-plans – reached, no match (HTTP 404)

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Public pricing in SIEM and security operations: 8 of 40 companies

✗weight 2 of 3

Third-party requests seen on the first load, before any interaction.

Checked 1 address on 2026-10-13.

Show the 1 address we checked
  1. https://expel.com/ – third-party requests before any interaction: 986-vwl-068.mktoresp.com, a.clarity.ms, ad.doubleclick.net, alb.reddit.com, analytics.twitter.com, api.claydar.com, arclight.vimeo.com, assets.adoberesources.net, b.6sc.co, bam.nr-data.net, bat.bing.com, bat.bing.net, bzr.openai.com, bzrcdn.openai.com, c.6sc.co, cdn.claydar.com, cdn.cookielaw.org, epsilon.6sense.com, f.vimeocdn.com, geolocation.onetrust.com, i.vimeocdn.com, ipv6.6sc.co, j.6sc.co, js-agent.newrelic.com, js.zi-scripts.com, munchkin.marketo.net, p.typekit.net, pixel-config.reddit.com, player.vimeo.com, project-hummingbird-hummingbird-websocket-nodejs-de-112831.cloud.adobe.io, px.ads.linkedin.com, region1.analytics.google.com, scripts.clarity.ms, snap.licdn.com, static.ads-twitter.com, static.claydar.com, static.oktopost.com, stats.g.doubleclick.net, t.co, use.typekit.net, vimeo.com, vod-adaptive-ak.vimeocdn.com, ws-assets.zoominfo.com, ws.zoominfo.com, www.clarity.ms, www.google.com, www.google.de, www.googletagmanager.com, www.redditstatic.com

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: No third-party tracking before consent in SIEM and security operations: 1 of 42 companies

Evidence

The full source lists sit behind these two groups, so that the answer above stays readable.

Published, with a source 8
✓

Data processing agreement (DPA)

weight 3 of 3

Published and readable without a login.

Source: https://expel.com/dpa/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Data processing agreement in SIEM and security operations: 8 of 39 companies

✓

Data location: where they say data is hosted

weight 3 of 3

The hosting location is stated on a public page.

  • Locations named next to the hosting wording United States. This does not establish the company’s headquarters.
    Show the exact wording

    Subprocessor Activity Hosting Location Amazon Web Services Cloud Infrastructure, Data Analytics United States Analyst1 Threat Intelligence Platform, Threat Intel data enrichment services United States...

    Read at https://expel.com/notices/

Source: https://expel.com/notices/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Data location stated in SIEM and security operations: 8 of 39 companies

✓

HTTPS enforced with HSTS

weight 2 of 3

HTTP redirects to HTTPS and the HSTS header is set.

  • HSTS max-age 31622400 seconds (366 days).
    Show the exact wording

    max-age=31622400; includeSubDomains; preload

    Read at https://expel.com/
  • HSTS options includeSubDomains, preload.
    Show the 2 exact wordings

    max-age=31622400; includeSubDomains; preload

    Read at https://expel.com/

    max-age=31622400; includeSubDomains; preload

    Read at https://expel.com/

Source: https://expel.com/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: HTTPS enforced with HSTS in SIEM and security operations: 31 of 42 companies

✓

Notice before subprocessors change

weight 2 of 3

The vendor commits publicly to giving notice before the list changes.

Source: https://expel.com/dpa/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Notice before subprocessors change in SIEM and security operations: 6 of 39 companies

✓

Certifications named (SOC 2, ISO 27001)

weight 1 of 3

SOC 2 or ISO 27001 named on a public page.

  • Named on that page CSA STAR (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), ISO/IEC 27001 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), ISO/IEC 27701 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), PCI DSS (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), SOC 2 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), SOC 2 Type II (not counted: the sentence does not carry it). The sentence we kept does not carry this finding on its own, so it counts in no list and no figure.
    Show the 6 exact wordings

    cations & attestations ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISO/IEC 27701:2019 SOC 2 Type II — Security PCI DSS SAQ-D CSA STAR Level 1 EU-U.S.

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

    Active certifications & attestations ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISO/IEC 27701:2019 SOC 2 Type II — Security PCI DSS SAQ-D CSA STAR Level 1 EU-U.S.

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

    Active certifications & attestations ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISO/IEC 27701:2019 SOC 2 Type II — Security PCI DSS SAQ-D CSA STAR Level 1 EU-U.S.

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

    Active certifications & attestations ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISO/IEC 27701:2019 SOC 2 Type II — Security PCI DSS SAQ-D CSA STAR Level 1 EU-U.S.

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

    Visit the trust center 0 SOC 2 exceptions since 2018 21 Log sources into our private internal SIEM 125 + Custom insider threat & p

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

    Active certifications & attestations ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISO/IEC 27701:2019 SOC 2 Type II — Security PCI DSS SAQ-D CSA STAR Level 1 EU-U.S.

    Read at https://expel.com/security-compliance/

Source: https://expel.com/security-compliance/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Certifications named in SIEM and security operations: 19 of 40 companies

✓

Uptime SLA with a figure

weight 1 of 3

An availability commitment with a figure.

  • Highest uptime figure on that page 100 %.
    Show the exact wording

    o the following table: System Availability *Credit as a Percentage of One Month of Service 99.95% – 100.00% 0% 99.00% – 99.94% 10% 95.00% – 98.99% 25% Less than 95.0% 50% Notwithstanding the foregoing...

    Read at https://expel.com/sla/

Source: https://expel.com/sla/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Uptime SLA with a figure in SIEM and security operations: 4 of 39 companies

✓

security.txt (RFC 9116)

weight 1 of 3

Served at /.well-known/security.txt.

Source: https://expel.com/.well-known/security.txt · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: security.txt (RFC 9116) in SIEM and security operations: 7 of 39 companies

✓

Named privacy contact (DPO or privacy address)

weight 1 of 3

A data protection officer or a dedicated privacy address is named.

Source: https://expel.com/notices/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Named privacy contact in SIEM and security operations: 19 of 39 companies

History

100 0 2026-10-06: 70 of 1002026-10-13: 61 of 100 2026-10-06 2026-10-13
Score over the last 2 runs we measured Expel in: 70 (2026-10-06), 61 (2026-10-13).

Prepare your vendor review

A source is a starting point. Check the product, plan, legal entity and date before treating it as evidence for your purchase. These questions do not change the transparency score.

Expel

8 found · 4 not found · 0 not measured across 12 public checks.

12 of 12 criteria have a measured result from the last 30 days. Oldest dated result: 2026-10-13.

Investigate 4 open evidence questions
  1. Subprocessor list

    Which subprocessors apply to our product, what does each process, and in which countries? Please share the current list.

    Inspect this check
  2. Status page with history

    Where can we review incident history for the service we will use, and how do we subscribe to incident updates?

    Inspect this check
  3. Public pricing

    Please confirm the total cost for our seats and usage, including minimum commitments, add-ons, overages and renewal terms.

    Inspect this check
  4. No third-party tracking before consent

    Which third-party requests occur before a visitor makes a choice, and for what purpose? Please distinguish the public website from the product.

    Inspect this check

Compare

A shortlist holds up to six vendors across categories and lives entirely in the address of its page: share the link, bookmark it, put it in a ticket. Nothing is stored, so we do not know it exists.