Transparency alternatives to Sportradar
Other Sports team management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Sportradar. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 39 that differ from Sportradar on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Sportradar has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, 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 Sportradar” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Sportradar | Found at Sportradar, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hudlhudl.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hudl | 50/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 1 Data processing agreement | Compare |
| TeamSnapteamsnap.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TeamSnap | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Pitcheropitchero.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pitchero | 35/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| SportsEnginesportsengine.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SportsEngine | 52/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| Spondspond.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Spond | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| TeamLinktteamlinkt.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TeamLinkt | 35/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Kitman Labskitmanlabs.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kitman Labs | 30/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Trackmantrackman.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Trackman | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Teamworksteamworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Teamworks | 22/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Kinexonkinexon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kinexon | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| UDiscudisc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to UDisc | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Clubforceclubforce.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clubforce | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, 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.