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 Skeptic
Has opened the browser's network tab on sites with a "certified" banner and watched the ad pixels fire before anything was clicked. Reads "consent rate optimisation" as a hint that reject will be grey and small, "auto-blocking" as a claim until the test steps are published, and "EU hosting" next to a US script CDN — and asks what leaving would cost: the consent logs, and every visitor asked again.
consentmanager
Didomi
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Banner & choice architecture
consentmanager
The privacy policy confirms consent can be granted or refused per purpose and per third-party provider, changed afterwards, and asked again twelve months later, while the site claims GDPR, Swiss, US and Canadian law support and AI-assisted banner testing on a Google-certified platform. We found no public information on whether reject sits on the first layer with the same weight as accept — the captured help page is titled 'how to add a reject link to the text', and a reject tucked into the body text is not what equal prominence looks like — nor on banner languages, accessibility, or the limits on what banner tests may optimise.
Didomi
The first layer is documented down to the deny paths — a disagree button, the cross button, a continue-without-agreeing link — and the agree-to-all and disagree-to-all buttons are written as enabled by default and impossible to switch off, which is the anti-dark-pattern statement I actually look for. Purpose-level and vendor-level choice, geo-targeted notices per regulation, 45+ languages with automatic detection and A/B testing are all on the record. I found no public information on banner accessibility (no WCAG statement) or on stated limits for what the consent-rate A/B tests may change.
Prior blocking & script control
consentmanager
Developer-reference and getting-started pages document automatic blocking of codes and cookies and the blocking of third-party codes, which is more than manual script surgery. We found no public information on content blockers or placeholders for videos and maps, tag-manager integration, or a documented way to verify in the browser that nothing fires before consent — and 'automatic' is a claim until the test steps are published.
Didomi
Blocking as documented runs through Google Tag Manager triggers you build yourself, one per non-IAB vendor, and the help centre is unusually honest about the trap: adding both triggers yields OR logic and cookies dropped without consent. Embedded video consent appears as a recommendation rather than a documented placeholder feature, and I found no public information on an automatic blocking mode, placeholders for maps or social embeds, or consent passed to forms and CAPTCHAs. What redeems it is the verification: scans treat trackers fired before consent as violations, and banner simulation checks accept-all, refuse-all and no-action behaviour.
Scanning & cookie classification
consentmanager
A cookie scanner is listed among the product modules with its own product page, and a help page exists on classifying unknown cookies — so unknowns appear to land on the site owner's desk for review rather than being silently sorted. We found no public information on scan frequency or depth, a maintained classification database with purposes, providers and lifetimes, alerts on new trackers, or a self-updating cookie declaration.
Didomi
The scanner is described in working detail: scraping sessions with a viewable recording, up to 20,000 pages per XL scan, selectable scan-origin country, logged-in scanning, custom user agents, and trackers split into cookies, pixels and local storage as well as first versus third party. Alerts the moment something changes, a time-stamped audit trail and JSON export are all stated. I found no public information on a maintained vendor database with purposes, providers and cookie lifetimes, or on how the classification itself is produced and reviewed.
Consent records & proof
consentmanager
A consent log protocol with an audit trail is published in the developer reference in English and German, and the privacy policy states choices are re-asked after twelve months and can be changed at any time. We found no public information on retention or storage location for the consent log, export of records, or a consent ID the visitor can look up — and when I ask what leaving this vendor would cost, the consent log is the first number I want.
Didomi
Every consent event is claimed captured, versioned and retrievable — legal teams can pull the exact UI a user agreed to on any date — with a proofs API, batch export, cross-device unification and cross-domain consent all documented. Proof of consent only becomes available 24 hours after the event, and I found no public information on consent-log retention, configurable expiry, or a consent ID the visitor can look up themselves. The records look built to answer a regulator, rather less to answer the data subject.
Frameworks, signals & platforms
consentmanager
The site describes itself as a Google-certified platform for consent collection, product pages exist for Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers, TCF v2 configuration is documented in two languages, and mobile app and connected TV consent are listed as modules alongside US state and Canadian law support. We found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID, Microsoft UET or other ad-platform signals, GPP or GPC, or a documented API and CMS plugins.
Didomi
The signal list is explicit — IAB TCF v2.2, GPP, Global Privacy Control, Google Consent Mode v2 with Google certification for web, apps and connected TV, Microsoft UET and an AWS consent signal — alongside an API and consent shared across domains and devices. The captured pages do state Consent Mode is supported only under the GDPR regulation, which is the kind of limit I want named. I found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID, agency or partner accounts, or whether Consent Mode basic and advanced modes are both supported.
European sovereignty
consentmanager
The contracting entity is consentmanager AB in Stockholm, a subsidiary of Italy's iubenda, and the privacy policy names PlusServer GmbH in Köln as host, claims processor-only processing, a data processing agreement with every customer, and no sale of data. The named subprocessors — Calendly (USA), Stripe (USA), PayPal (Luxembourg), Creditreform (Germany) — are booking and payment tools, and we found no public information on where the banner script is served from or where consent logs and scan results are stored, so the chain that runs on every visitor's page goes undescribed. Half a sovereignty case: European entity, parent and named host, silence on the rest.
Didomi
The contracting entity is solidly European — a Paris-registered company with a French VAT number, a reachable data protection officer and the CNIL named as complaint authority — but the chain behind it thins out fast: the website's hosting is attributed to Amazon Web Services LLC at a Seattle address, and transfer safeguards are invoked without saying what data goes where. I found no public information on where consent logs and scan results are stored, on the subcontractors along the chain, or on a published data processing agreement. ISO 27001 is claimed, though the captured pages do not state its scope.
Pricing transparency
consentmanager
We found no public information on pricing: no tier names, prices, page-view or domain limits, overage rules, free tier terms, add-on prices, minimum term or setup fees appear in anything captured, including the pricing page itself. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from what was read.
Didomi
A pricing page exists and names three tiers with their inclusions — scan frequency, seat counts, domains unlimited but metered on MUV — yet every plan ends in contact-us, so no annual cost can be computed from public pages alone. The only free thing is a compliance-monitoring scan snapshot, and premium items like the XL scan are routed to a sales representative. What leaving would cost, in data-return or cancellation terms, is not addressed anywhere I read.
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.