whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Accounting

Visma eEkonomi

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Visma Spcs AB (Visma) · www.visma.se

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Visma eEkonomi: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Visma eEkonomi: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

Visma eEkonomi at a glance

Vendor
Visma Spcs AB (Visma)
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Visma eEkonomi 0/5, the mean of 6 judges. Visma eEkonomi lands at the bottom of this bench. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources

Visma eEkonomi alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Founder

Weighted verdict

Runs a twelve-person company and does the books on a Sunday. Wants bank feeds that match themselves, invoices out in a minute, and the VAT return submitted without learning ELSTER. Will pay for the hour saved, and notices when the headline price was not the invoice.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Founder

Panel median The Founder This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Founder
Bookkeeping core 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
GoBD, immutability & audit 0 of 5 0 of 5
Tax handling & filings 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
Receipts, banking & matching 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
Tax adviser handoff 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
European sovereignty 0.5 of 5 0.5 of 5

Bookkeeping core

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.

Report an error

The Founder

The captured pages stay at corporate marketing level — customer counts, companies, an AI-and-security tagline — and we found no public information on double-entry, SKR03/SKR04, journals, opening balances or period close. The legal notice even states the group website is not used to offer software products directly to end users, so the ledger underneath is entirely unevidenced; I give a point only because this is sold as accounting software. 1 2

Report an error

GoBD, immutability & audit

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.

Report an error

The Founder

We found no public information on immutability of postings, a change log, statutory retention, a Verfahrensdokumentation, or any GoBD conformity statement — the pages speak of security only in general terms. For a German audit, what was captured gives me nothing to hand a Betriebsprüfer. 1

Report an error

Tax handling & filings

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.

Report an error

The Founder

We found no public information on VAT logic, UStVA preparation, ELSTER submission, EÜR, OSS or reverse-charge handling; the homepage evidence covers growth focus and AI, nothing about filings. As the person who just wants the VAT return submitted without learning ELSTER, I cannot see from public capture whether any of that exists. 1

Report an error

Receipts, banking & matching

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.

Report an error

The Founder

We found no public information on bank feeds, bank statement import, receipt capture, OCR or matching rules — the matched bank feed I pay for is invisible in the evidence. Nothing captured shows how money or receipts reach the ledger. 1

Report an error

Tax adviser handoff

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.

Report an error

The Founder

We found no public information on DATEV export, any other adviser format, or adviser access of any kind. From what was captured, the year-end handover to my Steuerberater is a closed box. 1 2

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

The Founder

The only legal terms captured place the site operator in Oslo under Norwegian law with the courts of Oslo, and the entity actually contracting for the product is not confirmed on the captured pages. Hosting location, subprocessors and any archive export that would keep my retention duty alive after leaving are all unstated, which as a German buyer leaves my books under a non-EU jurisdiction I can't verify. 2 1

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

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.

Report an error

The Founder

No price of any kind appears in what was captured — no tiers, no booking or user limits, no billing period, no word on where things like adviser access would sit. The corporate legal notice says the website is not used to offer products directly to end users, and we found no public information on what this product costs, so I cannot compute even a rough annual invoice. 1 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about Visma eEkonomi

Is Visma eEkonomi European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Visma eEkonomi is based.

Where does Visma eEkonomi store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

Does Visma eEkonomi have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Visma eEkonomi?

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: Visma eEkonomi alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

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.

Do you know more about Visma eEkonomi? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (2)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor page www.visma.se Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.visma.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →