Transparency alternatives to Replicated Compatibility Matrix
Other Test automation vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Replicated Compatibility Matrix does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 46 that differ from Replicated Compatibility Matrix on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Replicated Compatibility Matrix has 5 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “publishes and Replicated Compatibility Matrix does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Replicated Compatibility Matrix does not | Replicated Compatibility Matrix publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PractiTestpractitest.com | 39/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| Cypresscypress.io | 65/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Testsigmatestsigma.com | 48/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Applitoolsapplitools.com | 43/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| ACCELQaccelq.com | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| Horizonthetestmart.com | 35/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Endtestendtest.io | 48/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 3 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Kobitonkobiton.com | 35/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | Compare |
| Applauseapplause.com | 26/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | Compare |
| RadViewradview.com | 26/100 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | 5 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| Testimtestim.io | 26/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Xraygetxray.app | 26/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 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.