Transparency alternatives to Zvoove
Other Staffing agency software vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Zvoove. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 33 that differ from Zvoove on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Zvoove has 10 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Zvoove” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Zvoove | Found at Zvoove, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kordiskordisai.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kordis | 70/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Loxoloxo.coSee also Transparency alternatives to Loxo | 70/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Recruit CRMrecruitcrm.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Recruit CRM | 55/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Gemgem.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gem | 43/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Firefishfirefishsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Firefish | 35/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Recruiterflowrecruiterflow.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Recruiterflow | 35/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Bilflobilflo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bilflo | 35/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Crelatecrelate.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Crelate | 35/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| Beamerybeamery.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Beamery | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Trufflstruffls.deSee also Transparency alternatives to Truffls | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Tempworkstempworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tempworks | 22/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Status page with history | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Vincerevincere.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Vincere | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.