As of 30 Oct 2026, the panel rates consentmanager 2.5/5 and Didomi 3.5/5 in Consent Management (CMP). Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick consentmanager and 6 pick Didomi. consentmanager scores higher on 1 of 6 criteria (European sovereignty). Didomi scores higher on 5 of 6 criteria (Scanning & cookie classification, Consent records & proof, Banner & choice architecture, plus 2 more). Provenance — consentmanager: EU-Made; Didomi: EU-Made. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
Didomi is ahead on six of seven criteria — banner and choice 7.5 to 5.2, prior blocking 5.8 to 4.2, scanning and classification 7.8 to 4.2, consent records 7.7 to 4.3, standards and platforms 7.0 to 5.5, each 6 judges to 0, and pricing transparency 2.5 to 0.7 with 5 leans and 1 tie; pricing is not weighted in Didomi's verdicts. Sovereignty is the exception: 6 judges to 0 lean consentmanager, 5.8 versus 4.0. consentmanager's attributes list data residency and subprocessor exposure as EU only, and the verdict documents PlusServer GmbH hosting in Cologne, a data processing agreement and named subprocessors with countries; Didomi's attributes list both as unknown, and its verdict names Amazon Web Services LLC at a Seattle address as host of the vendor's own website. Weighted totals per judge span 6.3 to 7.0 for Didomi and 4.3 to 5.1 for consentmanager. The benches split by criterion, not by judge.
Choose consentmanager if
You need consent data to stay in the EU: consentmanager's data residency attribute reads EU only, while Didomi's reads unknown.
Your vendor review requires subprocessor exposure within the EU only: that attribute reads EU only for consentmanager and unknown for Didomi.
You must sign a data processing agreement with the vendor as processor and review named subprocessors with countries and safeguards before rollout: the verdict documents both for consentmanager.
Your auditors want the hosting entity and corporate chain on record: the verdict names a Swedish entity under Italian parent iubenda and PlusServer GmbH hosting in Cologne.
Choose Didomi if
You need scanning behind logins, from a chosen country, or across up to 20,000 pages: scanning and classification is 7.8 to 4.2, 6 judges to 0 for Didomi.
Your legal team must pull the exact consent UI a user agreed to on any date: Didomi's versions-and-proofs module backs consent records at 7.7 to 4.3.
You want a one-click deny route beside accept and agree/disagree buttons that cannot be disabled: banner and choice is 7.5 to 5.2 for Didomi.
Your stack leans on standards and platform support: standards and platforms is 7.0 to 5.5 in Didomi's favor.
You prioritize prior blocking ahead of consent: it is 5.8 to 4.2 for Didomi, with the verdict noting manual per-vendor Google Tag Manager setup at its low end.
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The In-House Lawyer
In-house counsel at a retailer with shops in Germany, France and Austria, who has read the court decisions on missing reject buttons and the regulators' banner guidance. Wants § 25 TDDDG and the GDPR mapped to concrete settings, equal-weight choices as the default, consent that can be withdrawn as easily as it was given, and records that would hold up if a competitor or a consumer group sued.
consentmanager
Didomi
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Banner & choice architecture
consentmanager
The privacy policy documents that visitors can grant or refuse consent per purpose and per third-party vendor and change their settings later, with the banner asking afresh after twelve months — the granularity I look for under § 25 TDDDG. The legal notice lists GDPR, TDDDG, Swiss, US-state and Canadian solutions, Google certifies the platform for consent collection with AI-supported banner testing, and help pages exist on adding a reject link and on the site owner's own designs and texts. The captured facts leave open whether reject stands on the first layer with equal weight, per-country geolocation rules, the banner's own accessibility and how many languages ship.
Didomi
The help centre documents an equal-weight first layer — "Agree and close" sits beside "Disagree and close", a cross button and a "Continue without agreeing" link — and the agree/disagree pair is enabled by default and cannot be disabled, which is exactly the design the German courts demand. Choices run by purpose and by vendor, resurfacing is required to be as easy as first display per the quoted TCF 2.2 policy, geolocation serves different experiences per regulation, 45+ languages come with automatic detection, and every published notice version is kept so the choice shown can be reconstructed. We found no public information on accessibility certification for the banner or on stated limits for consent-rate A/B tests.
Prior blocking & script control
consentmanager
The help centre carries a getting-started guide and a developer reference on automatic blocking of codes and cookies, so blocking before consent is a documented capability. We found no public information in the captured facts on placeholders for embedded videos or maps, tag-manager or server-side tagging integration, consent passed to forms and plugins, or a documented way to test that nothing loads too early.
Didomi
Blocking is documented through Google Tag Manager in real depth: one trigger per non-IAB vendor gated on the Didomi consent variable, consent events for single-page sites, and an explicit warning that mixing triggers drops cookies before consent — the kind of honest pitfall documentation I look for. Server-side tagging is offered on request, embedded videos are addressed, and the monitoring product treats trackers fired before consent as violations, so the owner can verify nothing loads early. We found no public information on an automatic script-blocking mode or maintained content blockers with placeholders for named embeds.
Scanning & cookie classification
consentmanager
The legal notice lists a cookie scanner, a privacy-statement generator and a compliance monitor among the product's modules, and a help page exists on classifying unknown cookies. The captured facts state nothing on rescan intervals, a maintained database of services with purposes, providers and lifetimes, alerts on new or changed trackers, or a declaration that updates itself from the scan.
Didomi
A bot scrapes configured domains and can log in, scan from a chosen country, cover up to 20,000 pages and be watched back as a recording, sorting findings into cookies, pixels and local storage and splitting first-party from third-party. Rescans run monthly or weekly by plan, alerts go out the moment something changes or misfires, and outputs are audit-ready with a time-stamped historical trail and JSON export. We found no public information on a maintained classification database with purposes, providers and lifetimes, or on a cookie declaration that updates itself from the scan in several languages.
Consent records & proof
consentmanager
A developer reference documents the consent log protocol as an audit trail, and the privacy policy states settings can be changed later with consent requested again after twelve months. The captured pages give no information on what each record contains, retention and storage of the consent log, a consent ID the visitor can look up, withdrawal recorded as its own event, or export of the log — exactly what I would have to produce if a consumer group or a competitor sued.
Didomi
The versions and proofs module keeps every published notice and end-user consent record for audits and complaints, and the vendor states legal teams can pull "the exact UI a user agreed to, on any date" — precisely the evidence I would need facing a regulator or a consumer group. Proofs can be attached to consent events and retrieved through an API, consent is unified across devices and domains, and proof of consent is available within twenty-four hours. We found no public information on a tamper-evident log, configurable consent expiry, or a consent ID the visitor can look up themselves.
Frameworks, signals & platforms
consentmanager
Google certification for consent collection is stated verbatim, and mobile-app consent and connected-TV consent are listed as product modules; feature and help pages cover Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF v2 configuration for publishers. We found no public information in the captured facts on a registered CMP ID, GPP or Global Privacy Control, Microsoft or other ad-platform signals, CMS plugins, multi-domain or agency accounts, or an API.
Didomi
The signal list is broad and current — IAB TCF v2.2, GPP, Google Consent Mode v2 with Google certified-partner status covering web, apps and connected TV, Microsoft UET consent mode, AWS consent mode and automatic Global Privacy Control handling — and there is a REST API with an admin API and batch export. The TCF integration shares consent status to selected IAB vendors with a standard banner text already validated by the IAB. We found no public information on a registered CMP ID, basic versus advanced Consent Mode modes, named CMS plugins, or agency accounts managing many client sites.
European sovereignty
consentmanager
The chain that is on the record is European: consentmanager AB in Stockholm owns the product with sales through companies in Hamburg and Paris, the parent iubenda sits in Milan, hosting is named as PlusServer GmbH in Cologne, an order-processing agreement is concluded with every customer, and subprocessors such as Calendly and Stripe are listed with their locations and transfer bases. We found no public information on where the banner script and consent logs are served and stored, on the platform's own CDN, scanner or geolocation providers, or on ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certifications.
Didomi
The contracting entity is European and evidenced — Didomi SAS at 137 Boulevard de Sébastopol in Paris, registered with the Paris RCS, with a French VAT number, a DPO address and SCCs plus adequacy safeguards named for transfers — and the company states ISO 27001 certification with replication across at least two physically separated data centers. But the captured pages give no location for the banner script, consent logs or scan results, no subprocessor list and no published processing agreement; the only hosting fact is that the vendor's own website is hosted by Amazon Web Services LLC at a Seattle address.
Pricing transparency
consentmanager
We found no public information on pricing: a pricing page was captured, but no price per domain or licence, tier limits or overage, add-on costs, minimum term or VAT treatment appears in the captured facts, so a buyer cannot compute an annual cost from what we read.
Didomi
Every tier — Essential, Advanced, Premium — is priced "Contact us", with a free Compliance Monitoring scan as the only no-cost entry point, so a buyer cannot compute an annual cost from the public pages. The plan matrix does publish inclusions such as unlimited domains based on MUV, scan frequency and auditing-scan counts, which shows the scaling logic even though no figures are attached. Connected TV consent, cross-device consent, server-side tagging, preference management and the XL scan are all marked upon request or premium without prices.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
consentmanager
Didomi
Legal entity
Not determined
Not determined
Hosting location
Not determined
Not determined
Hosting options
Not determined
Not determined
Open source
Not determined
Not determined
Data processing agreement
Not determined
Not determined
Transfer impact assessment
Not determined
Not determined
Facts, side by side
Only facts both products carry under the same definition — anything else would not be a fair row.
As of 30 Oct 2026, the panel rates Didomi higher: 3.5/5 against 2.5/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick consentmanager and 6 pick Didomi. 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 consentmanager or Didomi European?
consentmanager is European (EU-Made). Didomi is European (EU-Made). Provenance is read from each company’s own legal pages: who builds it and who owns it.
Do consentmanager and Didomi have a free plan?
As of 30 Oct 2026, Didomi’s own pages state a free plan; consentmanager’s pages as captured do not. Each product page links the pricing page it was read from.