Status.io

United States · status.io · 19 vendors

Resilience scores

Technology vendors

Services catalogue

2 services in catalogue across 2 categories; runs on 19 sub-vendors.

Insights

Last updated 2026-08-15 · revision 2

19 direct vendors, 222 subvendors

Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Migration Readiness: 7/10

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.

Status.io exhibits a moderate level of migration readiness, primarily due to its cloud-aware infrastructure, leveraging AWS services and DigitalOcean, and the availability of a comprehensive RESTful API. This API-driven approach, documented via Scalar, enables programmatic management of incidents, components, and subscribers, which significantly facilitates automation and integration during a migration. The adoption of modern authentication methods like SAML SSO and OIDC, along with webhook automation, further enhances its flexibility for transitioning to new environments. However, the assessment is constrained by the absence of critical information regarding the core application's architecture (e.g., whether it's containerized or microservices-based), which is a key indicator for migration complexity. Furthermore, there is no data on specific regulatory environments or data residency requirements, which are crucial considerations for any migration strategy. The 'Vendor Lock-in Risk: Unknown' and the ambiguous 'Total Vendors: 0' (despite detailed vendor geographic data) make it difficult to fully assess vendor-related migration challenges. While there is vendor geographic diversity, the exact number of unique vendors and potential lock-in associated with 'Total Services: 22' is not fully clear. The lack of financial stability data also means the ability to fund a significant migration is unknown.

Compliance

6 in-scope frameworks identified; showing 3.

PCI DSS (source) — Partially Compliant

Status.io accepts payment card data for subscription plans but explicitly states it does not store credit card information on its servers — all payment processing is handled by Stripe, Inc., which uses PCI-compliant servers. By outsourcing payment processing entirely to Stripe (a PCI DSS Level 1 certified service provider), Status.io significantly reduces its own PCI DSS scope. Risk is Low because the company has appropriately scoped out of direct card data handling. However, Status.io should maintain a SAQ (Self-Assessment Questionnaire) appropriate to its merchant level and Stripe integration type (likely SAQ A or SAQ A-EP).

Evidence: https://status.io/security, https://stripe.com/docs/security

CCPA — Partially Compliant

Status.io explicitly addresses CCPA in its Privacy Policy (added August 12, 2020), providing California residents with rights of access, deletion, and non-discrimination. The company provides a contact mechanism (legal@status.io and mailing address) for CCPA requests and commits to a 45-day response window. However, the company has not publicly disclosed whether it meets the CCPA applicability thresholds (annual gross revenue >$25M, OR processes personal data of 100,000+ consumers/households, OR derives 50%+ of revenue from selling personal data). The company explicitly states it does not sell personal data. Risk is Medium because CCPA enforcement by the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) is active, and gaps in formal documentation (e.g., no publicly available 'Do Not Sell' opt-out mechanism, no disclosed data categories sold) could attract scrutiny.

Evidence: https://status.io/privacy

EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework — Compliant

T3CH.com LLC has self-certified under the EU-U.S. DPF, UK Extension to the EU-U.S. DPF, and Swiss-U.S. DPF as set forth by the U.S. Department of Commerce. This certification is verifiable at dataprivacyframework.gov and is subject to FTC enforcement. The DPF provides a lawful mechanism for transferring personal data from the EU, UK, and Switzerland to the US. The company has designated JAMS as its independent recourse mechanism for unresolved complaints. Risk is Low because the DPF is a formally recognized transfer mechanism under GDPR Article 45 (adequacy decision for DPF issued by European Commission on July 10, 2023), and the company's certification is current and publicly verifiable.

Evidence: https://status.io/privacy, https://www.dataprivacyframework.gov/, https://www.jamsadr.com/DPF-Dispute-Resolution

Financials

Financial Resilience Score: 5/10

Status.io is a privately held US-based SaaS company that has been operating continuously since 2013, suggesting a sustainable business model without visible outside capital. The company operates a pure subscription revenue model with four published pricing tiers ranging from $79/month (Basic) to $999+/month (Enterprise), which typically implies relatively predictable recurring revenue. Its long operating history of over a decade indicates the business has weathered various market conditions and maintained continuous product development, as evidenced by active changelog entries from 2013 through 2026. However, the company operates in a highly competitive market dominated by well-funded players like Atlassian Statuspage, with newer entrants such as Instatus, Better Stack, and Freshstatus undercutting on price. The apparent small team size (bootstrapped operation with no visible external funding) constrains sales and marketing scale. Additionally, the concentration risk in a niche product category makes Status.io vulnerable to bundling by larger observability platforms like Datadog, New Relic, and PagerDuty. The complete absence of published financials limits any third-party ability to assess liquidity, profitability, or customer concentration, resulting in a mid-range resilience score reflecting both the longevity strengths and the transparency/competitive risks.

Key strengths: Long operating history since 2013 (over a decade of continuous operation), Recurring SaaS subscription revenue model with predictable ARR, Four-tier pricing structure ($79-$999+/month) including enterprise deals, Enterprise-grade features (SSO/SAML, audit trails, custom TLS, private status pages), Low capex cloud-hosted software business, Continuous product releases and active development through 2026

Risk factors: Highly competitive market dominated by Atlassian Statuspage, Price competition from newer entrants (Instatus, Better Stack, Freshstatus), Apparent small team size limiting sales/marketing scale, Concentration risk in single-purpose niche SaaS category, Vulnerability to bundling by larger observability platforms (Datadog, New Relic, PagerDuty), No financial transparency limiting resilience assessment, No visible institutional funding backing

Revenue by product/service

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.

View the full interactive report