Transparency alternatives to FaceUp
Other Whistleblowing systems vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at FaceUp. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 23 that differ from FaceUp on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
FaceUp has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at FaceUp” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at FaceUp | Found at FaceUp, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistlelinkwhistlelink.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Whistlelink | 35/100 | 3 Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Ethenagoethena.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ethena | 30/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Public pricing | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Signalistsignalist.deSee also Transparency alternatives to Signalist | 29/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Whispliwhispli.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Whispli | 26/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Trustytrusty.reportSee also Transparency alternatives to Trusty | 22/100 | 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Convercentconvercent.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Convercent | 13/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | Compare |
| NAVEXnavex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NAVEX | 30/100 | 1 Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Case IQcaseiq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Case IQ | 26/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Ethicoethico.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ethico | 26/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| EQS Groupeqs.comSee also Transparency alternatives to EQS Group | 22/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Data location stated | Compare |
| Ethicontrolethicontrol.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ethicontrol | 17/100 | 1 Public pricing | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| SAI360sai360.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SAI360 | 17/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +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.