Transparency alternatives to Jotform
Other Surveys and forms vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Jotform. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 48 that differ from Jotform on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Jotform has 4 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Jotform” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Jotform | Found at Jotform, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formbricksformbricks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Formbricks | 52/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| SurveySparrowsurveysparrow.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SurveySparrow | 61/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Refinerrefiner.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Refiner | 57/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Typeformtypeform.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Typeform | 45/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Survicatesurvicate.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Survicate | 43/100 | 1 Data processing agreement | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history | Compare |
| Netigatenetigate.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Netigate | 35/100 | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| HappyOrNothappy-or-not.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HappyOrNot | 30/100 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| SoSci Surveysoscisurvey.deSee also Transparency alternatives to SoSci Survey | 30/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | Compare |
| Wufoowufoo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Wufoo | 50/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 1 Subprocessor list | Compare |
| Cognito Formscognitoforms.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cognito Forms | 43/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Filloutfillout.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fillout | 43/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 3 Subprocessor list, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Forms.appforms.appSee also Transparency alternatives to Forms.app | 35/100 | nothing we found there and not here | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 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.