Condomana vs Immoware24

Condomana

Wirtschaftsplan and Jahresabrechnung are drafted from the year's bookings and apportioned 'by your keys', with unit advance payments computed on approval — that is exactly the anchor-5 picture, and the unit model tracks MEA. But nothing evidences the post-2021 BGH form with a separately shown Abrechnungsspitze, a Vermögensbericht, HeizkostenV apportionment, owner-change splits mid-year, dunning of Hausgeld arrears, or the Rücklage kept in trust with its own reporting; 'Sonderumlagen' is named and nothing more.

Immoware24

The WEG pages show Wirtschaftsplan, Gesamt- and Einzelabrechnung, Rücklagenabrechnung and the Vermögensbericht produced at a keystroke, per §28 WEG and claimed BGH-konform, with costs distributed automatically by defined keys, a Mahnwesen and dunning-ready bookkeeping. But the feature that makes such a claim true stays out of sight: we found no public information on the Abrechnungsspitze being broken out separately, on mid-year owner-change apportionment, or on heating-cost apportionment beyond the monthly consumption notice under §6a HeizkostenV.

Condomana

There is a real voting engine — each agenda item carries its basis (per head or by ownership share) and its majority, and closing the item computes the result — and the Beschluss-Sammlung is gapless, numbered, append-only with challenges and corrections annotated, which is solidly rubric level 5 and touches § 24(7) discipline. What I don't see: notice-period invitations, attendance and proxy recording, quorum or qualified majorities per resolution type, minutes generated from recorded votes, or any written-circulation procedure — the arithmetic that decides whether a Beschluss stands is only half evidenced.

Immoware24

The module demonstrably creates and sends the invitation, runs the meeting — hybrid, with online votes — and generates both the Protokoll and the Beschlusssammlung. What decides whether a resolution stands is the part I cannot find: no public information on attendance and proxy recording, on quorum or MEA-weighted and qualified majorities computed per resolution type, or on amendment and invalidation notes kept in the register as the reformed law requires.

Condomana

Owners see their building's documents, defects and news with per-owner document permissions, defect reports go in with a photo and a status everyone can see, and letting owners can invite their tenants — good scoping and real defect self-service. But nothing shows per-owner statements, meeting papers or voting available in the portal, nor consumption or arrears per unit, and no access log evidencing the disclosure duty being discharged on demand.

Immoware24

Portal24 is real self-service: per-user released documents and contract data after login, separate views for tenants and owners, defect and request forms with photo upload and a processing status visible to the reporter, monthly consumption information under §6a HeizkostenV delivered in the portal, plus Apple and Android apps. We found no public information on voting or the full meeting papers being available inside the portal itself, or on an access log over what an owner has viewed.

Condomana

Defect intake tracked open-to-done with photos, contractor assignment, and recurring maintenance that raises its own tickets at due date — rubric level 5 is fully met, and the forward-only timeline is an evidence trail a Verwalter can stand behind. Beyond that: no warranty/Gewährleistung periods tracked against a trade, no statutory inspections (lift, heating, fire, drinking water) scheduled with stored proof, and no quotes or invoices linked to the defect with cost allocated to the right account.

Immoware24

The ticket system covers intake with photos and a transparent status, routes work to contractors — quotes requested from several trades, compared, and the order awarded from inside the ticket, with vetted craftsmen via Craftware24 — and archives when closed. The recurring side of the building is the gap: we found no public information on a maintenance calendar with reminders, statutory inspections stored with proof of completion, warranty periods tracked per trade, or costs allocated to the right account.

Condomana

Full-text search with documents filed per building and unit, per-owner sharing permissions, and a 'vollständiger CSV-Export' plus a migration import — that is rubric level 5. But no version history, no evidence documents are linked to the resolutions and settlements that reference them, no structured handover package (ledger, register, documents, master data) a successor could actually load, and the only retention statement covers the vendor's own invoices, not the WEG archive.

Immoware24

Documents are stored, tagged and found, classified by the AI under custom filename rules, and delivered to owners digitally; a DATEV export exists for the bookkeeping side. The exit is the silence: we found no public information on version history, stated retention periods, or a defined handover export of a community's records a successor administrator could actually load — only the statutory portability right recited in the privacy notice.

Condomana

Hetzner in Gunzenhausen for hosting and mail, a German contracting entity (nelo digitalagentur GmbH & Co KG, HRA 725183 Ulm) as controller, tenant isolation and RBAC — the core chain is European and named, and third-country transfers are generally excluded. But the optional AI text-processing of Mängelmeldungen, Dokumente and portal requests runs through 'einen weiteren Auftragsverarbeiter' who is never named, and Buffer, Inc. (San Francisco) is a non-EU subprocessor whose legal basis I don't see stated; no certification published either.

Immoware24

Hosting is stated as exclusively in German, geo-redundant ISO 27001 certified datacenters, with a German contracting entity under German law, an external data protection officer and an AVV on offer. Against that, we found no public information naming the hosting provider, the ownership behind the GmbH, or a subprocessor list for the product itself, and the vendor states it uses tools of companies based in the USA — Microsoft tracking with data held on US servers for up to 180 days.

Condomana

€10 per unit per year plus VAT, parking and storage at a quarter of that, worked examples for 24 units (€240) and 120 units in five buildings (€1,200), all features in one tier with unlimited free verwalter and owners and no per-seat surprises — the annual invoice is derivable from the public page alone. Two unstated items keep it off the top: the minimum term is only implied by 'nichts automatisch', and the migration/rollout service has no number at all — the one figure a porting administrator will ask for.

Immoware24

The captured pricing pages describe a model — cost per Verwaltungseinheiten, active users and optional modules, pay-per-use with no fixed packages, a twelve-month minimum term, prices "zzgl. MwSt.", and a thirty-day trial — but no price figure appears anywhere. We found no public information on any per-unit amount, minimum invoice, or setup and migration fees, so an administrator cannot compute the annual cost for their units from these pages alone.