SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to NIPO Nfield

Other Surveys and forms vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at NIPO Nfield. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 48 that differ from NIPO Nfield on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

NIPO Nfield has 9 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, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at NIPO Nfield” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at NIPO NfieldFound at NIPO Nfield, not found there
Formbricksformbricks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Formbricks 52/100 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 3 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact Compare
Jotformjotform.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jotform 65/100 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 nothing Compare
SurveySparrowsurveysparrow.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SurveySparrow 61/100 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Refinerrefiner.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Refiner 57/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Wufoowufoo.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Wufoo 50/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 nothing Compare
Typeformtypeform.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Typeform 45/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Cognito Formscognitoforms.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cognito Forms 43/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Filloutfillout.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fillout 43/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Survicatesurvicate.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Survicate 43/100 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named nothing Compare
Forms.appforms.appSee also Transparency alternatives to Forms.app 35/100 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact Compare
Netigatenetigate.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Netigate 35/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact Compare
Formstackformstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Formstack 30/100 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact 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.