TimestampCompare

Scoring methodology

TimestampCompare uses a transparent, evidence-based scoring model to evaluate timestamping providers. Our goal is to help buyers make informed decisions without vendor bias.

📊

Scoring model

Each provider is scored from 0 to 10 across six weighted dimensions: regulatory qualification (eIDAS, national frameworks), RFC 3161 compliance depth, technical capabilities (API, bulk, HSM), hash algorithm support, archive timestamping and long-term validation, and geographic coverage.

🔍

Evaluation criteria

We assess publicly available documentation, API specifications, trust lists published by EU member states, independent audits, and direct vendor confirmations. Scores are cross-validated against multiple data sources.

🔄

Update cadence

Benchmark data is refreshed quarterly. Providers are re-scored whenever material changes to their services, certifications, or trust list status are confirmed.

🛡️

Transparency commitment

TimestampCompare does not accept paid placements or sponsored rankings. All scores are derived from publicly verifiable criteria. Our methodology is documented here for full accountability.

Authoritative standards & references

All scoring criteria are derived from the following primary regulatory and technical sources. This benchmark does not rely on vendor self-declaration alone.

Non-public data? Download the buyer template

Providers rarely publish pricing, performance SLAs, or capacity figures. Use our free due-diligence grid to ask them directly during your evaluation.

Download template (CSV) →

Provider Scoring Matrix

Compare timestamping providers across 20 criteria in 5 key categories

See full scoring matrix