Accounting
e-conomic
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Visma e-conomic A/S · www.e-conomic.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
e-conomic at a glance
- Vendor
- Visma e-conomic A/S
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates e-conomic 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. e-conomic, from Visma e-conomic A/S, earns its best marks where the money already flows: documents and banking scores range from 4 to 7, built on Aiia bank feeds several times a day, automatic reconciliation matching by date and amount, machine-learning posting suggestions and rules posting recurring entries to a counter account. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
e-conomic, from Visma e-conomic A/S, earns its best marks where the money already flows: documents and banking scores range from 4 to 7, built on Aiia bank feeds several times a day, automatic reconciliation matching by date and amount, machine-learning posting suggestions and rules posting recurring entries to a counter account. Bookkeeping core scores cluster at 4 — invoices book through a documented API and product groups steer sales accounts by VAT zone — but we found no public information on SKR03/SKR04, opening balances or a period close with locking. Weakest are GoBD compliance at 0 to 1, with no public information on a GoBD claim, a Verfahrensdokumentation, posting immutability or retention, and tax and filings at 2, where VAT-zone logic is credited but no filing is evidenced. The genuine split is documents and banking: the founder scored 7 for the automation, the bookkeeper 4, faulting the unevidenced receipt side; other scores sit at 6. Sovereignty attributes are on record as none, and bank data flows through Aiia. Package contents are named; we found no price figures.
Speaks for it
- Aiia bank integration transfers bank movements automatically into reconciliation several times a day
- Automatic matching runs by date and amount, with machine-learning posting suggestions and rules for recurring entries posting to a counter account
- Invoices book through a documented REST API, with product groups steering sales accounts by the VAT zone on the customer and invoice
- Foreign-currency bank accounts reconcile, alongside manual CSV statement import and multiple bank accounts
- The vendor states accountants can be given direct, digital access to the books
Held against it
- GoBD compliance scores sit at 0 to 1: we found no public information on a GoBD claim, posting immutability, a change history or retention periods
- We found no public information on any tax filing — no UStVA, ELSTER, EÜR or balance-sheet output, and no OSS or reverse-charge handling
- Sovereignty attributes are on record as none, and we found no public information on hosting location, a subprocessor list or an export that keeps statutory retention alive after leaving
- We found no public information on DATEV or any named export format for the adviser, nor on whether the adviser's access is read-only
- We found no public information on opening balances, SKR03/SKR04 or a period close with locking
Best for
- You want the bank side to run itself — automatic Aiia feeds several times a day, matching by date and amount, and learned posting suggestions for recurring entries
- You invoice programmatically and want a draft booked — and optionally sent by email or electronically — in a single API request
- You sell across VAT zones and want product groups to steer each posting to the right sales account on the customer and invoice
- You operate a Danish entity sending electronic invoices (EAN, CVR, P-number, PEPPOL) to NemHandel-registered recipients
Avoid if
- You answer to German tax audits and file German returns — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your entity has no Danish CVR number and you depend on electronic invoice delivery — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You must document hosting location and subprocessors before signing — sovereignty attributes are on record as none, and bank data flows through Aiia as the one named third party
- Your German tax adviser works from a DATEV export — adviser handoff scores range 2 to 4, and the tax adviser's own rationale warns that a login without a documented export does not get the year into their software
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Bookkeeping core | 2 of 5 |
| GoBD, immutability & audit | 0 of 5 |
| Tax handling & filings | 1 of 5 |
| Receipts, banking & matching | 3 of 5 |
| Tax adviser handoff | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
Bookkeeping core
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
Real postings are evidenced: invoices book through the API, recurring bank rules post to a counter-account in the day book, and the sales account follows the customer's VAT zone — but I found no public information on a German chart of accounts (SKR03/SKR04), manual journal entries, opening balances, or a period close that locks. A posting engine without a close is only half a ledger. 2 3 4
The Tax Adviser
The journal mechanics are real — entries with counter accounts in the day book, invoices booked through the API, and sales accounts that switch by VAT zone — so this is a double-entry ledger, not a cashbook. But I found no public information on SKR03/SKR04, opening balances, or a period close with locking, which is what I need before a Jahresabschluss; foreign currency appears only inside bank reconciliation. 2 3 4 5
The Auditor
A real ledger is visible: bookings carry contra accounts, the sales account follows the VAT zone on the customer, and rules write recurring entries into the day book. I found no public information on period locking, opening balances, or a German chart of accounts such as SKR03/SKR04. 2 3 4
The Founder
Booking invoices to real accounts via product groups and VAT zones, a day book with posting rules, and dimension layers — the posting engine is genuine. But I found no public information on German charts of accounts (SKR03/SKR04), opening balances or a period close, which is what I need under my ledger. 2 3 4
The Integrator
There is a real ledger under this: invoices book through a documented endpoint, product groups steer sales postings to accounts by VAT zone, and recurring rules land in the journal with a counter account, plus extra dimension layers in the higher package. We found no public information on opening balances, period closing or locking, so I stop short of calling it a close-capable ledger. 2 3 4
The Skeptic
Invoice booking through the API, product groups driving sales accounts by VAT zone, and multiple dimension layers show a real posting engine underneath. But I found no public information on SKR03/SKR04, opening balances, or any period close with locking, and the skeptic in me wants to see the close before calling it a ledger. 2 3 4
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 captured pages say nothing about unalterable postings, a change log, statutory retention or a Verfahrensdokumentation, and I found no public GoBD claim anywhere in them. With nothing on immutability, retention or documentation, there is nothing here for an auditor to hold on to. 1 5
The Tax Adviser
The captured pages mention nothing on GoBD, immutability of postings, a change history, retention periods or a Verfahrensdokumentation — I found no public information on any of it. For a German tax audit that is the entire question, and it is unevidenced. 1
The Auditor
I found no public information on a GoBD claim, a Verfahrensdokumentation, a change history, or any statement on statutory retention, and nothing on whether posted entries can still be altered or how corrections are booked. For an audit, that silence is the finding. 1
The Founder
The captured pages say nothing about GoBD, audit trails, unalterable postings, retention periods or a Verfahrensdokumentation — I found no public information on any of it. For a German tax audit that is as good as undocumented. 1 5
The Integrator
Nothing captured addresses audit survival: we found no public information on posting immutability, a change history, retention periods, or any process documentation the vendor supplies. That is bare silence rather than an unsupported marketing claim, so I score just above the floor. 1 5
Tax handling & filings
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
VAT zones steer which sales account a posting hits, which is genuine logic beyond a bare rate field. But I found no public information on any VAT return — no electronic submission, no EÜR, no OSS or reverse-charge handling — so nothing in these pages shows a filing ever leaves the building. 2 3
The Tax Adviser
VAT is structured — VAT zones select the sales account per transaction and there is a VAT zones endpoint in the API — but that is where it ends. I found no public information on UStVA, ELSTER, EÜR, a balance sheet or OSS; the electronic invoicing references (NemHandel, EAN, Peppol) concern sending invoices, not German filings. 2 3
The Auditor
VAT logic goes beyond a rate field, with sales accounts selected by the customer's VAT zone and a documented VAT-zones API. I found no public information on any German filing — no UStVA, no ELSTER submission, no EÜR or balance sheet output, and no OSS or reverse-charge handling. 2
The Founder
VAT zones drive which sales account a posting lands on, so there is real VAT logic beyond a rate field. But I found no public information on UStVA, ELSTER submission, EÜR, reverse charge or OSS — no German filing of any kind appears in the captured pages. 2
The Integrator
VAT zones actively select the correct sales account per customer and invoice, and foreign-currency payments reconcile — more logic than a bare rate field. We found no public information on any return being generated or submitted electronically to a tax authority, nor on reverse-charge or cross-border schemes. 2 3 5
Receipts, banking & matching
panel disagrees
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
Banking is the strongest part: Aiia feeds transfer movements several times a day, automatic reconciliation matches on date and amount, machine-learning proposals suggest the posting, and rules exist for recurring entries, with outbound electronic invoicing via NemHandel/PEPPOL. But I found no public information on receipt capture, OCR, receipts linked to postings or compliant archiving — so the exception count after the automation is only half the story. 3 4 5
The Tax Adviser
Automatic bank feeds several times a day via Aiia, machine-learning posting suggestions, matching by date and amount, and rules for recurring entries in the day book — solid work, well past manual matching. However, we found no public information on receipt OCR, inbound e-invoicing, or documented replacement scanning, and electronic invoicing is shown outbound only in the Danish NemHandel sense. 3 4 5
The Auditor
Banking is well documented: automatic transfers via Aiia several times a day, matching on date and amount, machine-learning posting suggestions, rules for recurring entries, foreign-currency accounts and manual CSV import. I found no public information on receipt capture, OCR or compliant archiving, and electronic invoicing is evidenced only outbound through NemHandel and PEPPOL. 3 4 5
The Founder
This is the Sunday-saver: bank feeds several times a day via Aiia, automatic reconciliation matching by date and amount, machine-learning posting suggestions, fixed rules for recurring entries, and foreign-currency accounts. What I could not find is receipt capture with OCR or inbound e-invoicing, so the paper side of the evidence chain stays manual. 3 4 5
The Integrator
The money side is genuinely wired in: an open-banking feed through Aiia pulls movements several times a day, machine-learned suggestions propose the posting, and rules with counter accounts handle recurring items — imports designed to reconcile, not duplicate. We found no public information on receipt capture or OCR, and electronic invoicing is evidenced outbound only (EAN, CVR, P-number, PEPPOL), so the inbound evidence chain stays open. 3 4 5
The Skeptic
This is where the evidence lives: automatic Aiia feeds several times a day, matching on date and amount, machine-learning posting suggestions, and rule-based handling of recurring entries — a working automatic pipeline, plus multiple bank accounts and foreign currency reconciliation. I found no public information on receipt OCR, ZUGFeRD/XRechnung e-invoicing, or replacement scanning and archiving, which is what separates this from the top grades. 3 4 5
Tax adviser handoff
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
One line says an accountant can be given direct, digital access to the books, which beats a pile of PDFs, but I found no public information on DATEV export or on any named export format. Whether a German adviser could work in or from these books is simply not shown. 1
The Tax Adviser
Direct digital access for the accountant is stated on the vendor's page — good as far as it goes. But I found no public information on any export of the books to a named format, DATEV above all, nor on whether the adviser's access is read-only and scoped; a login without a documented export does not get the year into my software. 1
The Auditor
The vendor states the accountant can be given direct, digital access to the books, which beats a pile of PDFs. I found no public information on any export format for the adviser — DATEV in particular is never named — nor on a read-only or scoped adviser login or an audit of what the adviser changed. 1
The Founder
The vendor promises my accountant direct, digital access to the books, and an extended advisory package is listed among the features. But I found no public information on a DATEV export, on any named export format, or on what that access actually lets the adviser do. 1 4
The Integrator
The vendor states accountants can be given direct, digital access to the books, which beats a pile of PDFs. We found no public information on a named accounting export format or on what that access permits, so I cannot confirm the adviser works inside the system rather than around it. 1 3
The Skeptic
Direct, digital access for the accountant is stated plainly, which is more than a year-end pile of PDFs. But I read for the DATEV export and the tier where it appears, and I found no public information on DATEV or any named export format, nor on whether the adviser's access is read-only or scoped with an audit of changes. 1
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 entity is the Danish Visma e-conomic A/S and the help centre is Danish, but the only third party named anywhere is the Aiia bank connection. I found no public information on hosting location, a subprocessor list, certification, or an export that keeps statutory retention alive after leaving the vendor — thin ground for a ten-year retention duty. 1 5
The Tax Adviser
The vendor is named as a Danish company, but the captured pages give nothing on hosting location, on any subprocessor list, or on an export that preserves statutory retention after the contract ends. The only third party named anywhere is Aiia, and one integration partner is not a published chain — that lands near the bottom. 1 4
The Auditor
The contracting entity is Danish, but I found no public information on where the books are hosted, on a published subprocessor list — notable when bank data flows through Aiia — or on any archive export that keeps statutory retention alive after the contract ends. 1 4
The Founder
The vendor is a Danish company inside the EU, but that is where the trail ends: I found no public information on where the books are hosted, which subprocessors see them, or how statutory retention survives leaving the vendor. As far as the captured pages go, the books' location is a matter of trust. 1 5
The Integrator
The contracting entity is the Danish Visma e-conomic A/S, but we found no public information on hosting location, a subprocessor list, or an export that would satisfy retention if the contract ends. With no independently sourced sovereignty attributes on record, only the absence-based floor applies. 1 5
The Skeptic
No sovereignty attributes are on record: hosting location, subprocessor list, certification and any archive export that keeps retention alive after leaving are all unevidenced. The vendor name suggests a Danish contracting entity, which keeps this off the floor, but I found no public information confirming EU hosting or naming any subprocessor — and Aiia handles the bank data with that relationship undocumented on these pages. 1 5
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
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
The captured pages name a Smart package with features such as an extra user and holding-company agreements, but I found no public information on tier prices, billing periods, limits or terms. A business cannot compute its annual invoice from what is here. 1 4
The Tax Adviser
The features page names packages, an extra user and extended approval as tier content, so a tiered model exists. But we found no price figures at all — no monthly price, no billing period, no booking or account limits, nothing on what adviser access costs — so a business cannot compute an annual invoice from the public pages. 4
The Auditor
One captured page names what a package contains — bank integration, extra user, extended voucher approval — but I found no public information on any price, billing period, limit or VAT treatment. A business cannot compute its annual invoice from these pages. 4
The Founder
Package contents are named — bank integration, extra user, extended advisory — but no price, limit, minimum term or VAT treatment appears anywhere I was shown. I cannot compute even a rough annual invoice from public pages, and that is exactly the surprise I resent. 1 4
The Integrator
A package feature list is published — bank integration, extended approval, extra dimension layers, an extra user — which at least shows where the walls between tiers stand. We found no public price figures anywhere, so a business cannot compute its annual invoice from the captured pages. 1 4
The Skeptic
One package's feature list is published — bank integration, extended approval, an extra user, a holding-company agreement — but I found no public information on any price, booking limit, billing period, or what an extra bank account costs. A buyer cannot compute a single month's invoice from these pages, let alone the year's. 4
Questions about e-conomic
Is e-conomic European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where e-conomic is based.
Where does e-conomic store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does e-conomic have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to e-conomic?
As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates Papierkram (3.5/5), sevDesk (3/5) and BuchhaltungsButler (3/5) highest among the other 24 Accounting products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Papierkram (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: e-conomic alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 Oct 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.
- 21 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
- 15 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 compliance 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
- 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
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (5)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.e-conomic.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Bookkeeping core — found from sitemap www.e-conomic.dk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Bookkeeping core — found from sitemap www.e-conomic.dk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Receipts, banking & matching — found from sitemap www.e-conomic.dk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Receipts, banking & matching — found from sitemap www.e-conomic.dk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →