As of 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates 360Learning 1.5/5 and Docebo 1.5/5 in Talent Management. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 2 of the 6 judges pick 360Learning and 4 pick Docebo. 360Learning scores higher on 2 of 6 criteria (Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback and Performance reviews & calibration). Docebo scores higher on 3 of 6 criteria (Works council, visibility & AI disclosure, HRIS sync, integrations & data portability and Learning, skills & succession). Provenance — 360Learning: EU-Made; Docebo: EU origin, foreign-owned. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
360Learning and Docebo split this bench along one line. Docebo leads learning and development (means 7.5 vs 6.8, four judges lean Docebo, two tie), codetermination and privacy (3.7 vs 1.8, six lean Docebo), and integrations and portability (6.0 vs 4.7, six lean Docebo), on documented retention and anonymisation, and Workday sync with SAML 2.0 single sign-on. 360Learning leads performance reviews (0.8 vs 0.0, four lean 360Learning, two tie) via recurring skills self-assessment with manager validation, goals and feedback (2.5 vs 0.0, six lean 360Learning), and pricing transparency (3.2 vs 2.0, six lean 360Learning): its Team tier is 8 € per user per month for up to 100 users, while Docebo publishes no prices. Sovereignty ties at 3.2 vs 3.2 (one lean each way, four ties); 360Learning lists jurisdiction, ownership, residency and subprocessors as unknown, Docebo lists jurisdiction as IT. Of five published weighted totals, four lean Docebo, one leans 360Learning.
Choose 360Learning if
You need performance reviews in some form: four judges lean 360Learning and two tie (means 0.8 vs 0.0), on its recurring skills self-assessment with manager validation.
Your team sets goals and exchanges feedback inside the platform: six of six judges lean 360Learning (2.5 vs 0.0), with goals stopping at individual learning targets.
You need a published price to compare: the Team tier is 8 € per user per month for up to 100 users, and six of six judges lean 360Learning on pricing transparency (3.2 vs 2.0).
Choose Docebo if
You deliver standards-based e-learning: SCORM 1.2/2004, Tin Can/xAPI and AICC content plus a marketplace of over 30,000 courses; learning and development leans Docebo four judges to none, with two ties (7.5 vs 6.8).
You plan skills-driven career paths, internal mobility and workforce planning: Docebo's AI infers, normalises and validates skills to feed them, within its learning and development lead (7.5 vs 6.8).
Your works council reviews privacy documentation: retention and anonymisation are documented in depth, and codetermination and privacy leans Docebo six judges to none (3.7 vs 1.8).
You run Workday or require SAML 2.0 single sign-on: integrations and portability leans Docebo six judges to none (6.0 vs 4.7).
You need the vendor's legal entity in a named jurisdiction: Docebo's legal entity jurisdiction is IT, while 360Learning's is listed as unknown.
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The HR IT Integrator
Connects the tool to the HR system and the identity provider and will be asked for the data when the contract ends. Wants org chart and manager relations synced from the HRIS, SSO and SCIM, a documented API, and a full export of reviews and goals rather than one PDF per person.
360Learning
This judge's pick
Docebo
Criterion by criterion
Performance reviews & calibration
360Learning
What the product pages document is skills self-assessment with manager validation and scheduled assessment prompts — a recurring assessment cycle, but for skills rather than performance ratings. The descriptions of 360-degree reviews, quarterly reviews and peer and upward review sit on a guide page about the company's own internal practice, and I found no public information on configurable review templates, rating scales or calibration views in the product.
Docebo
The captured pages present Docebo as a learning platform with a skills-intelligence module — the pricing tiers list certifications, compliance tracking and learning features — and we found no public information on review templates, rating scales, self, manager or 360° input, or calibration views. "Upskilling, reskilling, and performance" appears as a use case for turning skill gaps into performance gains through learning, not as a review cycle the product runs.
Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback
360Learning
Learner-defined growth targets with progress tracked against job requirements and personal development plans are documented, which reaches the basic level of individual goals with tracking. I found no public information on company or team goal alignment, 1:1 meetings with shared agendas, or feedback requests that feed into a review.
Docebo
We found no public information on individual or team goals, OKR alignment, progress check-ins, 1:1 agendas or feedback between colleagues; the skills pages speak of career paths, internal mobility and reskilling instead. The published tier feature lists cover learning, certification and compliance tracking, analytics, automation and integrations.
Learning, skills & succession
360Learning
This is the product's core: skills profiles with gap visualization against role requirements, career profiles and AI-driven target job mapping against a job framework, learning paths and onboarding courses, a SCORM player, and upskilling campaigns with skill growth tracking on top of a 20,000-skill standard ontology. I found no public information on completion tracking of mandatory training, talent reviews such as a nine-box, succession plans per key role, or export of certificates and training records, which keeps it below the top band.
Docebo
This is the product's core: SCORM 1.2/2004, Tin Can/xAPI and AICC content, blended, ILT and virtual-classroom formats, a marketplace of over 30,000 courses and certifications, compliance and certification tracking, and AI that infers, normalises and validates skills from roles and learning activity. Career paths, internal mobility against opportunities and workforce planning with skill gaps, readiness and risk are documented. We found no public information on nine-box-style talent reviews, per-role succession plans or exportable training records, which keeps it just short of the top band.
Works council, visibility & AI disclosure
360Learning
Managers and admins reviewing and validating learner assessments gives a documented role distinction on assessment data, and the AI features are at least named with what they do — AI tagging of courses, content recommendations, a SkillsGPT chatbot, AI course creation. I found no public information on visibility rules per role, anonymity thresholds, retention or deletion settings, access logging, or an admin switch to turn AI features off — not enough yet to draft a works agreement against.
Docebo
Retention and deletion are genuinely configurable — anonymisation recipes with a per-country retention table in days and a fixed-retention variant, additional user fields processed only when configured in — which is what a works agreement needs on deletion. Five AI agents are named and described by what they do, and customer content is stated not to be used for AI training. We found no public information on visibility rules per role, minimum group sizes for anonymous results, access logging, an option to switch AI features off, or works-council documentation.
HRIS sync, integrations & data portability
360Learning
Personio is documented as automatic user data sync with certified-partner status, SAP SuccessFactors is named as a connected tool, a Skills API plus ontology and assessment import are offered, and the Slack integration is certified with training-assignment notifications. As the one who will be asked for the data when a contract ends, I note the documented flows all run into the platform: I found no public information on SSO, SCIM, org-chart or manager-relation sync, or any export of review, goal or feedback history out of it.
Docebo
SSO via SAML 2.0 with Okta, OneLogin and Microsoft Entra ID, Microsoft Teams among the named integrations, an API with a published limit of 100 calls per minute on the Enterprise plan, and a maintained Workday sync importing employee and organisational data with segmentation by geography, department and level — that is a real HR-system hookup. Workday is the only named HR system, and we found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, manager-relation sync or a bulk export of the complete history at contract end. Connector-module activation goes through the account manager and may carry additional costs.
European sovereignty
360Learning
The imprint names 360Learning GmbH in Karlsruhe with a German commercial register entry and VAT ID as the entity behind the German offering, and a privacy policy is published. Beyond that German entity the chain is not evidenced: I found no public information on hosting location, on subprocessors including the providers behind SkillsGPT and the AI content builder, or on a data processing agreement covering employee data.
Docebo
A privacy policy and a data processing addendum are published, but the contracting picture is a group: the privacy policy binds "Docebo S.p.A. and/or any of its other corporate affiliates", and the imprint lists entities in Italy, France and the UK alongside Toronto, Athens GA, Dubai and Australia. The US entity certifies under the EU-US Data Privacy Framework with FTC oversight and an intra-group transfer agreement exists, while hosting locations are not stated on the captured pages. No subprocessor list is published, so we found no public information on where the data is hosted or who processes it, including for the AI features.
Pricing transparency
360Learning
One tier is fully priced with its basis — Team at 8 € per user per month for up to 100 users, with a free trial — while Business and Enterprise are shown only as individual quotes. I found no public information on which modules sit in which tier, add-on prices for the AI features, minimum term or VAT treatment, so a real annual cost above 100 users is not computable from public pages.
Docebo
No prices are public — the pricing page states "Custom pricing tailored to your organization's needs" — so the real annual cost is not computable from public pages. Credit for structure: two tiers with their feature lists, monthly, yearly and registered active-user models, a one-year minimum term with typical three-to-five-year contracts, a 250-learner minimum, an overage policy and the setup-fee practice are all stated. Because not a single figure is published, a buyer can map the structure but not the invoice.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
360Learning
Docebo
Legal entity
Not determined
Not determined
Ownership
Not determined
Not determined
Data residency
Not determined
Not determined
Subprocessors
Not determined
Not determined
Questions about 360Learning and Docebo
Which is better, 360Learning or Docebo?
As of 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates both 1.5/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 2 of the 6 judges pick 360Learning and 4 pick Docebo. Which one fits depends on the criteria that matter to you; the table on this page shows both side by side, and each judge’s reading has its own page. Both were scored by the same AI bench under the same rubric, from public evidence only, as the methodology describes.
Is 360Learning or Docebo European?
360Learning is European (EU-Made). Docebo is European (EU origin, foreign-owned). Provenance is read from each company’s own legal pages: who builds it and who owns it.