Condomana vs Immoware24

Condomana

Wirtschaftsplan with computed per-unit Hausgeld and a Jahresabrechnung drafted from the year's bookings, apportioned by keys and frozen on approval, Sonderumlagen included — that clears the mid anchor. But the evidence is silent on the Rücklage as separately-booked trust money, on HeizkostenV apportionment, the Vermögensbericht, the BGH Abrechnungsspitze and dunning of Hausgeld arrears — the things my March run actually turns on.

Immoware24

The WEG settlement pages show Wirtschaftsplan, Gesamt- and Einzelabrechnung, Rücklagenabrechnung and the Vermögensbericht per § 28 WEG generated at a button press, costs distributed automatically by defined keys, BGH-conform form claimed, and Mahnwesen in the bookkeeping module — that carries my March run. I found no public information on the Abrechnungsspitze shown separately, on apportionment when an owner changes mid-year, or on the settlement arithmetic tracing back to individual postings, which is what separates a defensible settlement from a printable one.

Condomana

The Abstimmungs-Engine carries each agenda item's basis (per head or by ownership share) and computes the result, and the Beschlusssammlung is gapless, append-only, with challenges and corrections annotated rather than overwritten — genuine § 24 (7) behaviour. What I do not see: invitations respecting the notice period, proxy and attendance recording, or minutes generated from the votes.

Immoware24

A dedicated Eigentümerversammlung module is evidenced: invitations created and sent, the meeting conducted with online voting, minutes and the Beschlusssammlung generated, protocols signed eIDAS-conform on tablet or smartphone. We found no public information on notice periods, proxy and attendance recording, majority arithmetic per resolution type, or register maintenance with amendment and invalidation notes, so I stop short of trusting it for a contested resolution.

Condomana

Per-owner document scoping, defect reports with photo and status everyone can see, announcements per building, and tenants invited in by their landlord — the visibility separation is right. But there is no evidence owners see their own statements, arrears or meeting papers in the portal, let alone an access log discharging the Einsichtsrecht.

Immoware24

Portal24 gives tenants and owners their own views with only their released contract data and documents, defect reports with photo upload and a transparent processing status that arrive as tickets, and the monthly consumption information per § 6a HeizkostenV delivered to residents in the portal. I found no public information on an access log behind the disclosure duty or on arrears shown per unit.

Condomana

Defects run from open to done with photos and a forward-only timeline I could stand behind, contractor assignment, and recurring maintenance that raises its own ticket at due date — mobile and offline included. No evidence of statutory inspections with stored proof, Gewährleistung tracking, or costs allocated back to the plan's accounts.

Immoware24

The ticket system evidences defect capture with photos, a four-step workflow through to archiving, quote requests to several contractors with the award issued from the ticket, and vetted craftsmen via Craftware24. We found no public information on a recurring maintenance calendar with reminders for the statutory inspections — lift, fire safety, drinking water — or on warranty period tracking, which across forty buildings is the part that ends up in court.

Condomana

Full-text search filed per building and unit, per-owner permissions, ten-year retention stated on the § 257 HGB / § 147 AO basis, and a vollständiger CSV-Export with no automatic renewal. But a CSV is data, not a handover package: version history, document export in open formats and a successor-loadable Übergabe are unevidenced.

Immoware24

The document management stores, tags and finds records, with AI classification of incoming invoices and import of PDF, XML and ZUGFeRD files. We found no public information on retention periods executed per statutory rule, on version history, or on a defined handover export a successor administrator could actually load — and the exit is where a Verwalter gets judged.

Condomana

The imprint and privacy policy give me what the pipeline marked unknown: nelo digitalagentur GmbH & Co KG at AG Ulm, Hetzner in Gunzenhausen, EU-only servers, AI processing exclusively in the EU under an Art. 28 AVV with no model training, and the sole non-EU processor is Buffer in San Francisco publishing social posts — community records never touch it. The AI-Auftragsverarbeiter is engaged but unnamed, ownership and certification are unstated, so I stop short of the full anchor.

Immoware24

The captured pages name a German entity under German law, hosting exclusively in ISO 27001 certified data centres in Germany, an external data protection officer and a DSGVO-conform processing agreement on offer. We found no public information naming the hosting infrastructure, on ownership, or on a complete product subprocessor list, and the privacy policy itself discloses US third-country tools — Microsoft Clarity and Bing with storage on US servers — alongside the German chain.

Condomana

Ten euros per unit per year plus VAT, parking and storage at a quarter of that, unlimited users with invited owners always free, everything in one tier with no locked stages — and the two worked examples (24 units/240 €, 120 units/1,200 €) let me compute my forty communities' invoice on the back of an envelope. Only the bespoke migration service for large portfolios is unpriced, and no exit or export fee is stated outright.

Immoware24

The pricing page describes the basis — administrative units, active users, optional modules — with a twelve-month minimum term, multi-year discounts, a thirty-day trial and prices plus VAT, but the model is individual and we found no published figure for any tier or module. No administrator can compute an annual cost for their units and communities from these pages without a sales conversation.