Transparency alternatives to Plausible
Other Web analytics vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Plausible. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 32 that differ from Plausible on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Plausible has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Plausible” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Plausible | Found at Plausible, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contentsquarecontentsquare.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Contentsquare | 61/100 | 7 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | Compare |
| Mixpanelmixpanel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mixpanel | 78/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| PostHogposthog.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PostHog | 78/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Amplitudeamplitude.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Amplitude | 74/100 | 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| FullStoryfullstory.comSee also Transparency alternatives to FullStory | 57/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 3 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Umamiumami.isSee also Transparency alternatives to Umami | 57/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Heapheap.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Heap | 30/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +2 | Compare |
| LogRocketlogrocket.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LogRocket | 30/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, +2 | Compare |
| Rybbitrybbit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rybbit | 57/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Fathom Analyticsusefathom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fathom Analytics | 52/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Matomomatomo.orgSee also Transparency alternatives to Matomo | 52/100 | 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Simple Analyticssimpleanalytics.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Simple Analytics | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 4 Data processing agreement, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, +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.