Skip to content
Z Zendikt
Vendor trust scorecard

Deputy 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.

8.7
/10
strong
Verdict

Deputy carries a strong vendor trust profile across the six dimensions we score. Few material concerns at renewal or procurement.

Vendor Trust Score

Is Deputy a trustworthy vendor?

8.7/10
High trust
Pricing transparency
Published rates; no hidden fees
9.0
Contract fairness
Reasonable terms; no auto-renew traps
8.5
Incident response
How they handle outages and breaches
8.5
Post-acquisition behavior
Customer treatment after M&A or PE
8.5
Executive stability
Leadership churn over 24 months
9.0
Roadmap honesty
Public commitments held
8.5
Trust signal log
  • 2018-03-22
    Series B of 300 million dollars led by IVP and OpenView
    The round predates the 2022-2024 valuation reset; the company has stayed heads-down on product execution since.
  • 2024-09-15
    Founder Ashik Ahmed still serving as CEO 17 years in
    Executive stability is unusual at this scale; product roadmap continuity has been a notable customer-cited strength.
  • 2025-11-10
    Predictive scheduling compliance toolkit expanded for Chicago and Philadelphia fair-workweek ordinances
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 2026-05-09. Scoring methodology: editorial standards. Disagree? Tell us.