SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Swat.io

Other Social media management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Swat.io. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 25 that differ from Swat.io on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Swat.io has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Swat.io” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at Swat.ioFound at Swat.io, not found there
Dash Socialdashsocial.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dash Social 70/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 2 Status page with history, Public pricing Compare
Sprout Socialsproutsocial.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sprout Social 74/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +2 nothing Compare
Hootsuitehootsuite.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hootsuite 70/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Statusbrewstatusbrew.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Statusbrew 70/100 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Sprinklrsprinklr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sprinklr 43/100 5 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), +2 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Vista Socialvistasocial.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vista Social 43/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Agorapulseagorapulse.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Agorapulse 48/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) nothing Compare
Emplifiemplifi.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Emplifi 48/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Named privacy contact nothing Compare
Publerpubler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Publer 48/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named 1 Status page with history Compare
Brandwatchbrandwatch.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Brandwatch 43/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
ContentStudiocontentstudio.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to ContentStudio 39/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 1 Status page with history Compare
Khoroskhoros.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Khoros 39/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS 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.