Alternatives to OneSignal
Other Transactional email and notifications vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that OneSignal does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 31 that differ from OneSignal on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
OneSignal has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact. The column “publishes and OneSignal does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and OneSignal does not | OneSignal publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mailosaurmailosaur.com | 74/100 | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | 2 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Resendresend.com | 83/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | nothing | Compare |
| Streamgetstream.io | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Couriercourier.com | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Ablyably.com | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| ClickSendclicksend.com | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Knockknock.app | 65/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Mailtrapmailtrap.io | 48/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Novunovu.co | 48/100 | 2 Data location stated, Certifications named | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Plunkuseplunk.com | 48/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Bentobentonow.com | 43/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Data location stated | 3 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| SMTPetersmtpeter.com | 36/100 | 2 Data location stated, 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.