Accounting
Agenda
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Agenda Informationssysteme GmbH & Co. KG · www.agenda-software.de
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Agenda Informationssysteme GmbH & Co. KG of Rosenheim, Germany, sells betriebswirtschaftliche Software as a complete system for tax advisers, with dedicated financial-accounting pages for bookkeepers and advisers. The most consistent showing is GoBD compliance at 2-4, resting on pages titled 'Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick' that exist for both audiences; sovereignty clustered at 2-3 on the German presenting entity alone, though every computed sovereignty attribute — jurisdiction, ownership, data residency, subprocessors — reads unknown. Weakest are documents and banking and pricing transparency, both 0-1: the captured pages show nothing on bank feeds, receipt capture or matching, and no price appears in them — engagement is a software presentation, a free online test or a free info package. Judges split 1-4 on bookkeeping core, tax and filings, and adviser handoff. The auditor, whose persona-weighted total of 3.2 sits far above the founder's 0.9, scored 4 across all three by crediting professional positioning; the lower scorers refused to credit mechanics the pages never document — double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, UStVA, ELSTER, a DATEV export.
Speaks for it
- Dedicated 'Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick' pages exist for both the bookkeeper and the tax-adviser audience.
- Positioned as a complete system for tax advisers, with a 'Software für Kanzleigründer' offering and a client-solutions page.
- Vendor presents as Agenda Informationssysteme GmbH & Co. KG of Rosenheim, Germany, with a German support line that judges read as ruling out a non-European contracting party.
- A free online test, a free info package and a bookable software presentation are offered on the homepage.
- Customer logins listed on the site include Kundenbereich, Unternehmens-Portal, Personal-Portal and Agito-Login.
Held against it
- We found no public information on prices, tiers, booking limits or terms — engagement is a presentation, a free test or an info package.
- We found no public information on bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules or e-invoices.
- We found no public information on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, manual postings, opening balances or a period close.
- We found no public information on UStVA, ELSTER submission, EÜR, reverse charge or OSS — no filing is evidenced.
- We found no public information on a DATEV export, receipt-linked handover or scoped adviser access for company users.
Best for
- You run a tax-adviser practice and want one complete system in which your firm, not the client, holds the books — the bench's highest handoff scores came from exactly that reading.
- You value a German vendor presence — a Rosenheim entity, a German support phone (08031 2561-420), a Verfahrensdokumentation page to start from — and will put hosting, subprocessor and pricing questions to a sales presentation.
- You prefer to evaluate before buying and are comfortable doing it through the free online test offered on the homepage rather than published tiers.
Avoid if
- Your books are prepared by an adviser who stays in DATEV and needs a documented export — the captured pages name no transfer format for a company whose adviser works elsewhere.
- Your workflow depends on matched bank feeds, receipt capture or e-invoice handling — the bench scored documents and banking 0-1.
- You need to see prices, tiers and limits before engaging a vendor — every captured path ends in a software presentation, a free test or an info-package request.
- You file your own VAT returns and need evidenced UStVA or ELSTER handling — the captured pages show a tax-software line for advisers but no filing.
The scores
Bookkeeping core
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Double-entry, the chart of accounts (SKR03/SKR04), postings, journals, opening balances and period closing — the ledger underneath the pretty screens.
0 — Income-and-expense lists only; no double-entry, no chart of accounts, no journal.
3 — Simplified bookkeeping suitable for EÜR with a fixed account list; no free posting, no period close.
5 — Double-entry with SKR03/SKR04, manual postings, journals, opening balances and a month-end close.
8 — Full ledger with cost centres, recurring and reversing entries, accruals, multi-year comparatives, and a documented close checklist with locking.
10 — An accountant's ledger: configurable charts including customised accounts, period locking with audit, foreign currency with documented valuation, group or multi-entity handling, and reporting that reconciles to the trial balance.
The Bookkeeper
Agenda sells accounting software lines to bookkeepers and tax-adviser practices, and the site carries dedicated financial-accounting pages for both audiences, but we found no public information on the mechanics that matter: double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, journals, opening balances or a period close. I score the professional positioning, not a ledger I cannot see. 1 2 3
The Tax Adviser
The vendor markets a complete system for tax advisers and maintains dedicated accounting-software pages, but I found no public information on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, journals, opening balances or a period close — nothing in what was captured describes the ledger underneath. 1 2 3
The Auditor
Agenda presents financial-accounting software for company bookkeepers and tax advisers as a complete system, which places it above simplified income-and-expense bookkeeping — but the captured pages show no detail on double-entry mechanics, SKR03/SKR04, journals, opening balances or period closing. 1 2 3
The Founder
The vendor advertises "betriebswirtschaftliche Software" and a complete system for tax advisers, with dedicated accounting-software pages — but we found no public information on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, manual postings, opening balances or period closing. As the one who has to close a month, I cannot see the ledger under the screens at all. 1 2 3
The Integrator
A complete business-software system is marketed to tax advisers, and dedicated accounting-software pages exist for both companies and advisers, but the captures include no statement on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, manual postings, journals, opening balances or a period close. I found no public information on the ledger underneath, so I credit little beyond the existence of the product line. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
The captured homepage sells a 'Komplettsystem' of betriebswirtschaftliche Software for Steuerberater, and pages dedicated to Rechnungswesen sit in the sitemap for both Buchhalter and Steuerberater — but the captured pages give no detail on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, manual postings, opening balances or a period close. A marketing label is not a ledger; the mechanics underneath are unevidenced. 1 2 3
GoBD, immutability & audit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the record survives a tax audit: unalterable postings, complete change history, retention across the statutory period, and a Verfahrensdokumentation the vendor actually supplies.
0 — Postings can be edited or deleted without trace; no retention statement, no GoBD claim, no documentation.
3 — GoBD asserted on the marketing page with nothing behind it — no described audit trail, no documentation offered, no statement on retention.
5 — Postings become unalterable after close with corrections booked as reversals, a change log exists, and the statutory retention period is stated.
8 — Documented GoBD conformity with a supplied Verfahrensdokumentation template, complete and exportable audit trail, receipts linked to postings, and a GoBD-compliant data export (GDPdU/Z3) for the auditor.
10 — Audit-ready as a product feature: an independent GoBD certification or attestation published, Verfahrensdokumentation maintained per release, tamper-evident journals, retention executed across the full statutory period, and an export the Betriebsprüfer accepts without argument.
The Bookkeeper
The site publishes a page promising the Verfahrensdokumentation at a glance for both the bookkeeper and tax-adviser audiences, and the homepage carries a "certified and awarded" line that names no certificate. Beyond those pages' existence we found no public information on unalterable postings, a change log, statutory retention or an auditor export, so I sit just under a bare GoBD badge with nothing captured behind it. 1 4 5
The Tax Adviser
Pages titled "Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick" exist for both audiences and the homepage proclaims the software certified and awarded without naming the certification, but I found no public information on the documentation's contents, an audit trail, postings becoming unalterable after close, or the statutory retention period. That is a claim with nothing verifiable behind it as far as my captures reach. 1 4 5
The Auditor
The vendor's own site carries pages titled Verfahrensdokumentation at a glance for both audiences — the document I ask for first — yet we found no public information on whether postings become unalterable after close, corrections are booked as reversals, a complete change history exists, or retention across the statutory period is stated. 4 5
The Founder
Pages titled "Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick" exist for both bookkeepers and tax advisers, plus a generic "Zertifiziert und ausgezeichnet" badge — which is marketing-assertion level. We found no public information on unalterable postings, a change history, retention across the statutory period, or an export the auditor would accept. 1 4 5
The Integrator
The vendor maintains pages titled "Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick" for both companies and tax advisers, which is more than a marketing badge, but the captures describe no audit trail, no tamper-evident postings and no statutory retention statement. The homepage's "Zertifiziert und ausgezeichnet" names no certification, so I cannot credit an attestation. 1 4 5
The Skeptic
This is exactly the case I read for: the site's own navigation carries a page addressed 'Verfahrensdokumentation auf einen Blick' for both audiences, yet the captured text never states a GoBD claim, an unalterable posting, a change history, a retention period or an auditor export. The page title is carrying the entire weight on its own; the feature that would make it true is unevidenced. 1 4 5
Tax handling & filings
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
VAT logic and the filings that follow: UStVA, ELSTER submission, EÜR or Bilanz, OSS for cross-border sales, and reverse-charge handling.
0 — No VAT logic beyond a rate field; no filings, no ELSTER.
3 — VAT rates and a UStVA figure to copy out by hand; no electronic submission, no special cases.
5 — UStVA prepared and submitted electronically via ELSTER, EÜR or a simple balance sheet produced, and reverse-charge and intra-community supply handled.
8 — The above plus OSS handling for cross-border B2C, Zusammenfassende Meldung, small-business (§19) and Ist/Soll taxation, permanent extension (Dauerfristverlängerung), and E-Bilanz where relevant.
10 — The filing year is handled end to end: every routine German filing generated and submitted electronically with validation before sending, cross-border VAT determined from the transaction rather than by hand, and correction filings supported.
The Bookkeeper
There is a dedicated tax-software line for tax-adviser practices, and this vendor's whole audience files for a living. But we found no public information on VAT logic, UStVA, ELSTER, EÜR, reverse charge or OSS, so I cannot credit a single filing the captured pages do not show. 1 6
The Tax Adviser
A tax-software section for advisers exists in the site structure, but I found no public information on UStVA, ELSTER submission, EÜR, reverse charge or OSS — not one filing is evidenced. 1 6
The Auditor
A dedicated tax software offering for tax advisers exists within the complete system, but we found no public information on VAT logic, UStVA preparation, ELSTER electronic submission, EÜR or balance sheet output, or OSS and reverse-charge handling. 1 6
The Founder
A tax-software page exists for tax advisers and the vendor targets them with a complete system, but we found no public information on UStVA, ELSTER submission, EÜR, OSS or reverse-charge handling. I submit my own VAT return, and nothing captured shows me how this product would do it. 1 6
The Integrator
A tax-software page is offered within the advisers' complete system, yet I found no public information on VAT logic, UStVA preparation, ELSTER submission, EÜR or balance sheet output, reverse charge or OSS. I cannot credit this criterion beyond the existence of a dedicated tax product. 1 6
Receipts, banking & matching
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How evidence and money get into the ledger: bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules, and whether the digital receipt is legally sufficient on its own.
0 — Manual entry only; no bank connection, no receipt storage.
3 — Bank statement import by file and receipt upload as plain attachments; matching is entirely manual.
5 — Automatic bank feeds for the major German banks, receipt upload with OCR, suggested matches, and receipts linked to their postings.
8 — PSD2 feeds across many institutions, rule-based automatic matching with learning, e-invoice handling (ZUGFeRD/XRechnung) both directions, and replacement scanning (ersetzendes Scannen) documented so paper can be destroyed.
10 — The evidence chain is closed: every posting reaches its receipt in one click, e-invoicing inbound and outbound as standard, documented compliant archiving of the digital original, and matching accurate enough that exceptions rather than transactions are the work.
The Bookkeeper
This is where I count what is left over after the automation, and on that I found no public information at all: no captured page addresses bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules or replacement scanning. A professional suite for advisers may have all of it; nothing captured shows any of it. 1
The Tax Adviser
I found no public information on bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules or compliant archiving of the digital original; no captured page addresses how evidence and money reach the ledger at all. 1
The Auditor
We found no public information on bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules or e-invoicing from the captured pages, so everything beyond manual entry rests unevidenced. 1 3
The Founder
We found no public information on bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR or matching — not even file import or plain attachments in the captured material. Matched bank feeds are the reason I would pay for software, and there is nothing here for me to evaluate. 1
The Integrator
I found no public information on bank connections, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules or e-invoice handling in either direction. The captured homepage names portals, a support line and a free test, and the captures show nothing on how money or receipts reach the ledger. 1
The Skeptic
I found no public information on bank feeds, receipt capture, OCR, matching rules, e-invoices or compliant archiving in any captured page. Even file-based statement import and plain receipt upload go unmentioned, so how evidence and money reach the ledger is entirely unevidenced. 1
Tax adviser handoff
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the books reach the Steuerberater — DATEV above all — and whether the adviser can work in the system rather than around it.
0 — No adviser access and no accounting export; the year-end is a pile of PDFs.
3 — Generic CSV or Excel export described as "suitable for your tax adviser", with no named format.
5 — A documented DATEV export (postings and, ideally, receipts) plus a read-only login for the adviser.
8 — DATEV export including receipt images with correct linking, or a maintained DATEV interface; the adviser gets their own scoped access with an audit of what they changed.
10 — The adviser is a first-class user: bidirectional DATEV exchange including corrections coming back, or a certified interface; period handover with locking, and a workflow where adviser queries are resolved inside the system.
The Bookkeeper
The roles are inverted here: this is the tax adviser's own complete system, with client solutions and a company portal among the customer logins, so the adviser works in the software by design rather than waiting for an export. Even so, we found no public information on DATEV exchange, adviser access controls, handover with locking or a change audit, so the mechanics the higher rungs demand stay unevidenced. 1 3 7
The Tax Adviser
The software is sold to tax advisers as their own complete system with client-facing portals, so the adviser works in their tool rather than receiving books — but I found no public information on a DATEV export, receipt-linked handover, scoped access with an audit of what the adviser changed, or period handover with locking. For a year-end close I need named formats, and none are named. 1 7
The Auditor
The system is sold to tax advisers as their complete system, so the adviser works in the software by design and a client-solutions page for advisers exists — but we found no public information on DATEV export, a documented period handover with locking, or scoped adviser access for company users. 1 7
The Founder
The vendor sells to tax advisers directly — "Komplettsystem", "Software für Kanzleegründer", a client-solutions page — but we found no public information on DATEV export, adviser access, or any named transfer format. My adviser works in DATEV, and the captured pages never show him a way in. 1 7
The Integrator
The vendor sells the complete system to the tax adviser directly — "Komplettsystem", "Software für Kanzleigründer", a client-solutions page — so the adviser works inside the vendor's own world rather than receiving an export. But I found no public information on a DATEV export or any documented handover format for a company whose adviser works elsewhere. 1 7
The Skeptic
The vendor sells to the Steuerberater directly — a 'Komplettsystem' with Mandanten-Lösungen pages in the sitemap — so the adviser is plausibly a user of the system rather than a recipient of exports, but I found no public information on a DATEV export, receipt linking or a scoped adviser login. The first thing every German buyer asks about is the DATEV path, and the captured pages are silent on it. 1 7
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the books live and who could be compelled to produce them — plus, uniquely here, whether statutory retention survives leaving the vendor. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated or non-EU, subprocessors unnamed — with a ten-year retention obligation attached to data held abroad.
3 — EU hosting offered while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — OCR, AI categorisation, support tooling — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or German hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, full subprocessor list published, and a stated export that satisfies retention if the contract ends.
10 — Sovereign and durable: German or EU hosting throughout, every subprocessor European, certification published, and a documented archive export that keeps the customer compliant for the full retention period after they leave.
The Bookkeeper
The contracting party is evidently German — a Rosenheim company under a German legal form with a German support line — so the books are not handed to a non-European vendor. Beyond that, we found no public information on where the data is hosted, which subprocessors are involved, or any export that would satisfy statutory retention after leaving the vendor. 1
The Tax Adviser
The vendor presents as German — Rosenheim company, German support line, European provenance — so a non-European contracting party is not indicated, but I found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity's jurisdiction in writing, or any subprocessor list. The absence of a published subprocessor list and any statement on retention after leaving the vendor settles it near the bottom of the scale. 1
The Auditor
The company presents itself from Rosenheim in Germany, but the captured pages give no information on hosting location, data residency, ownership or subcontractors; no published subprocessor list was found, and no statement on what export satisfies retention if a contract ends. 1
The Founder
The vendor presents as German — Agenda Informationssysteme of Rosenheim with an 08031 phone number, marked EU-made by the sourcing pipeline — but we found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity, subprocessors, or an export that keeps my retention duty alive if I leave. An EU vendor with no published subprocessor information is exactly where this lands. 1
The Integrator
The contracting entity is a German GmbH & Co. KG in Rosenheim with a German support number, which rules out the non-EU worst case. The captures state nothing on hosting location, subprocessors, or an export that keeps statutory retention alive after leaving the vendor. 1
The Skeptic
The vendor identifies as Agenda Informationssysteme GmbH & Co. KG of Rosenheim, Germany, which reads as an EU contracting entity, yet every computed sovereignty attribute — jurisdiction, ownership, data residency, subprocessors — comes back unknown. I found no public information on hosting infrastructure, a subprocessor list, or an export that preserves statutory retention if the contract ends. 1
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a business can compute the real annual invoice — including the bookings, users, bank accounts and adviser access they actually need — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A headline monthly price exists, but booking or document limits, extra users or the tier where DATEV export begins are unstated.
5 — Tier prices public with billing period stated and the main limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (DATEV export, extra bank accounts, adviser seat) sits in an unpriced tier.
8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with limits, overage, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; adviser access priced or explicitly free.
10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given transaction volume, user count and feature set, including overage and the year-end extras.
The Bookkeeper
No business could compute its annual invoice from what was captured: we found no public pricing information — no tier prices, limits, minimum terms or VAT treatment — and the visible path is a software presentation to arrange and a free info package to request. Every pricing question a buyer has ends in a phone call. 1
The Tax Adviser
No public price appears in anything I was shown; engagement is a software presentation or a free info package, so every tier is a sales conversation and a business cannot begin to compute its annual invoice. 1
The Auditor
The captured pages offer a free online test, a software presentation to arrange and a free info package to request, and no prices at all; a business cannot compute any real invoice from this. 1
The Founder
The captured pages offer a free online test, a presentation to book and a free info pack, but we found no public information on any price, tier, limit or term. I always check whether the headline price becomes the invoice, and here I cannot even find a headline. 1
The Integrator
The captured pages offer a free online test, a free info package to request and a presentation to arrange, and the captures show no price for any tier, user, booking limit, bank account or adviser access. I found no public pricing at all, so a business cannot compute an annual invoice from these pages. 1
The Skeptic
I found no public information on tiers, prices, booking limits or terms; the only money-adjacent facts are 'Software gratis online testen' and 'Gratis-Infopaket anfordern', with everything else routed through a sales presentation. I read specifically for the booking limit, the tier where DATEV export appears and what an extra bank account costs, and the captured pages give no figures for any of them. 1
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 15 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- We found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (agenda-software.de, agenda-software.de/buchhalter/software/rechnungswesen-software.php, agenda-software.de/steuerberater/software/rechnungswesen-software.php, agenda-software.de/buchhalter/verfahrensdokumentation-auf-einen-blick.php, agenda-software.de/steuerberater/verfahrensdokumentation-auf-einen-blick.php, agenda-software.de/steuerberater/software/steuer-software.php and 1 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 62 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 10 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
Sources (7)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.agenda-software.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Bookkeeping core — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Bookkeeping core — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 GoBD, immutability & audit — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 GoBD, immutability & audit — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Tax handling & filings — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Tax adviser handoff — found from sitemap www.agenda-software.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →