Skip to content
Z Zendikt
Vendor trust scorecard

DataRobot vendor trust score

Trust scoring is the “is this vendor a fair counterparty” question, deliberately separated from product quality. Six dimensions, dated, sourced where events warrant it.

6.3
/10
cautious
Verdict

DataRobot's vendor trust profile warrants caution. Below-average dimensions need explicit mitigation language in the contract.

Vendor Trust Score

Is DataRobot a trustworthy vendor?

6.3/10
Mixed
Pricing transparency
Published rates; no hidden fees
5.5
Contract fairness
Reasonable terms; no auto-renew traps
6.0
Incident response
How they handle outages and breaches
7.5
Post-acquisition behavior
Customer treatment after M&A or PE
6.5
Executive stability
Leadership churn over 24 months
5.5
Roadmap honesty
Public commitments held
6.5
Trust signal log
  • 2022-05-26
    Founder CEO Jeremy Achin stepped aside; Dan Wright became CEO
    First major executive change after the 2020 to 2022 peak; signaled the start of post-peak DataRobot turbulence.
  • 2024-02-20
    CEO change again: Dan Wright replaced by Debanjan Saha
    Second CEO change in 24 months. Compounding signal of post-peak instability; consistent with broader AutoML category decline since 2020 to 2022 peak.
  • 2024-09-22
    AutoML category share decline visible through 2023 to 2025
    Broader AutoML category has lost ground as generative AI absorbed data-science budgets; DataRobot revenue growth quiet relative to 2020 to 2022 peak.
Vendor Trust is scored independently of product quality. A great product from an unfair vendor still earns a low trust score.

How to read this score

  • Trust is separate from product quality. A vendor can ship great software and treat customers badly — or vice versa. We score the two independently.
  • 8.0+/10: strong. Few concerns at renewal or procurement.
  • 6.5–7.9: mixed. Negotiate hard on the lowest dimensions; monitor across the contract term.
  • 5.0–6.4: cautious. Add explicit mitigation language to the master agreement.
  • Below 5.0: concerning. Treat this as a contracted-risk evaluation, not a product-fit evaluation.
  • Updates: we re-verify scoring quarterly. Material trust events (acquisitions, breaches, leadership change, hostile contract terms) get logged on the timeline above.

Related editorial

Last updated 2026-05-10. Scoring methodology: editorial standards. Disagree? Tell us.