Gravity Forms
United States · www.gravityforms.com · 25 vendors
Rocketgenius, Inc. is the company behind Gravity Forms, a premium WordPress plugin. Gravity Forms enables users to create custom web forms with a drag-and-drop editor for lead capture, payment collection, and workflow automation. It offers features like conditional logic and integrates with various third-party services to streamline data management and business processes.
Resilience scores
- Digital Sovereignty: 64
- Digital Resilience: 4
Technology vendors
- Cookiebot (Cybot A/S) — Technology — Denmark
- Stripe, Inc. — Financial Services — United States
- Usercentrics GmbH — Technology — Germany
- and 23 more
Services catalogue
4 services in catalogue across 4 categories; runs on 25 sub-vendors.
- WordPress Forms Plugin
- Cloud Accounting Software
- Gravity Forms
Insights
Last updated 2026-07-30 · revision 1
25 direct vendors, 298 subvendors
Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)
- Poland: 1
- United States: 16
- Netherlands: 1
Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)
- UK: 1
- United Kingdom: 7
- Canada: 6
Migration Readiness: 3/10
Assessed by AI based on technology stack characteristics (cloud-native vs legacy, containerization, microservices), regulatory environment, data residency requirements, financial stability, and vendor lock-in risks. The score ranges from 0-10, where higher scores indicate better readiness for technology migration.
Gravity Forms demonstrates low migration readiness, scoring 25. **Challenges:** The core internal tech stack (WordPress, PHP, MySQL) suggests a more traditional, potentially monolithic architecture. Migrating such a system to modern cloud-native, containerized, or microservices environments would likely require extensive re-architecture and refactoring, posing significant challenges and costs. The absence of information regarding the regulatory environment and data residency requirements introduces substantial unknowns and potential complexities that would need thorough investigation and planning during any migration effort. Furthermore, financial stability data (revenue concentration, growth history) is missing, making it impossible to assess the company's capacity to fund a significant migration. Despite the contradictory 'Total Vendors: 0' entry, the reliance on 19 external services means that the 'Vendor Lock-in Risk' (currently unknown) is a critical factor; high lock-in would severely impede migration flexibility. **Opportunities/Mitigating factors:** While the 'Total Services: 19' suggests a potentially diverse set of external service providers, the unknown 'Vendor Lock-in Risk' means this cannot be definitively considered an opportunity for easier migration without further data. If these services are loosely coupled and easily replaceable, it could reduce migration complexity, but this is speculative.
Signed-in users can see whether their own company is exposed to this vendor's disruption, plus the full sub-vendor list and country breakdowns, every in-scope compliance framework plus gaps and next steps, and alerts when any of it changes.