Transparency alternatives to MOCO
Other Workforce and shift management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at MOCO. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 83 that differ from MOCO on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
MOCO has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, 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 MOCO” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at MOCO | Found at MOCO, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timelytimelyapp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Timely | 65/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Agendrixagendrix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Agendrix | 70/100 | 6 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| actiTIMEactitime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to actiTIME | 48/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| DeskTimedesktime.comSee also Transparency alternatives to DeskTime | 48/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 3 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| TimeCamptimecamp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TimeCamp | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| RotaCloudrotacloud.comSee also Transparency alternatives to RotaCloud | 43/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Time Doctortimedoctor.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Time Doctor | 43/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Beebolebeebole.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Beebole | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Lightning Boltlightning-bolt.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Lightning Bolt | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Deputydeputy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Deputy | 48/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named | nothing | Compare |
| Jibblejibble.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Jibble | 48/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Findmyshiftfindmyshift.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Findmyshift | 45/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.