whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

AI Agents & Assistants

Mistral Vibe

EU-Made 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 Mistral AI · mistral.ai

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

Link to this page

Mistral Vibe: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Mistral Vibe: 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.

Mistral Vibe at a glance

Vendor
Mistral AI
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 26 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 26 Oct 2026
Free plan
Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 26 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Mistral Vibe 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Mistral Vibe, the renamed Le Chat from Mistral AI, scores best on pricing transparency and admin and access, both clustering at 5-6: tiers run from a free plan through Pro at $14.99 /mo Excluding taxes to Team at $24.99 /user/mo Excluding taxes, and Team and Enterprise plans document single sign-on, user management with permissions, audit logs, an admin API and data export. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 26 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 28 Oct 2026. all sources

Mistral Vibe alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Head of IT

Weighted verdict

Has to roll an AI assistant out to eight hundred staff without a second shadow-IT wave. Wants SSO and SCIM, groups that decide who gets which model, agent and connector, answers that respect SharePoint permissions, audit logs for the SIEM, and a deployment option that is not "trust us".

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

Scored by The Head of IT

Panel median The Head of IT 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 Head of IT
Data use, training & retention 2.5 of 5 2.5 of 5
Models & processing location 2 of 5 2 of 5
Admin, identity & access controls 3 of 5 3 of 5
Integrations, connectors & knowledge 3 of 5 3 of 5
Agent capabilities & guardrails 2.5 of 5 3 of 5
European sovereignty 2 of 5 2 of 5
Pricing transparency 3 of 5 2.5 of 5

Data use, training & retention

How this is scored

What happens to prompts, uploaded files, connected data and outputs: whether any of it trains a model (the vendor's or a model provider's), how long it is kept and where logs live, whether zero-retention is available, and whether a data processing agreement covers it.

0 — No statement on training or retention; the privacy policy is a website policy that does not cover the product.

3 — A general statement that business data is "not used for training", with no word on retention, on the model providers behind the product or on logs.

5 — Business data excluded from training by contract, retention periods stated for chats and files, and a DPA offered to business customers.

8 — No-training commitments stated for the vendor and every model provider it routes to, retention configurable by the admin (including deletion of chat history), zero-data-retention terms with the model providers named, and abuse-monitoring retention described.

10 — Data use fully accounted for: training, retention, logging and abuse monitoring stated per model provider, customer-controlled retention and deletion with an audit trail, outputs and connected data treated as customer data in the DPA, and an independent audit (SOC 2, ISO 27001 or ISO 42001) covering the product.

Report an error

The Head of IT

Retention is documented in real detail — chats kept until the user deletes the conversation or the account, API inputs and outputs held for thirty rolling days for abuse monitoring, fine-tuning data until deleted — and a data processing agreement with controller and processor roles is published. But the default is that inputs and outputs train Mistral's models unless opted out, in-app thumbs feedback is used for training even under business terms, and the vendor states zero-data-retention is unavailable for Vibe Work and Chat regardless of plan, applying only to stateless API calls on pay-as-you-go with approval at Mistral's discretion. I could not sign this without a fight with our data protection officer. 5 6 7

Report an error

Models & processing location

How this is scored

Which models sit behind the product and who runs them, where inference and storage happen, whether the customer can pin processing to the EU, choose or exclude model providers, bring its own model or key, or run the product in its own cloud or on premises.

0 — The models behind the product and the processing location are not stated.

3 — The model family is named, but where inference runs and through which provider (the model maker, a hyperscaler, the vendor) is unstated.

5 — Models and their providers named, with an EU processing option stated for storage and at least the default model.

8 — Each available model listed with provider and inference region, EU-only processing selectable by the admin and enforced across models, model providers excludable, and bring-your-own-key or own-cloud deployment documented.

10 — Processing fully under the customer's control and documented: EU-only or on-premises inference for every feature including agents and connectors, open-weight or self-hosted models supported, data flows per feature published, and a residency commitment in the contract rather than on a marketing page.

Report an error

The Head of IT

The model families are named in depth — Mistral Large, Medium, Small, Ministral, Codestral, Voxtral, OCR and a self-hosted open-weights Shieldstral whose costs depend on our own infrastructure — plus a third-party Z.ai GLM on the API price list. Where inference runs and through which provider is not stated, the only hint being regional-inference Standard, Batch and Priority tiers on the API page, and we found no public information on an admin-selectable EU processing option. For an 800-person deployment I cannot pin processing from these pages. 10 12

Report an error

Admin, identity & access controls

How this is scored

What the IT department controls: SSO and SCIM provisioning, roles and groups, which models, agents and connectors each group may use, retrieval that respects the permissions of the source system, audit logs, usage reporting, and policies such as data-loss prevention — and whether reporting on staff use is scoped and documented.

0 — No admin features documented; accounts are individual sign-ups.

3 — A team workspace with an owner and member invitations, but no SSO, no roles and no audit log.

5 — SSO, admin and member roles, user management, and an admin view of usage.

8 — SAML/OIDC SSO with SCIM provisioning, group-based permissions for models, agents and connectors, retrieval that inherits source-system permissions, exportable audit logs, and usage analytics with documented scope.

10 — Governance a regulated company can operate: fine-grained policies (DLP, content filters, prompt and output logging rules), audit logs streamed to a SIEM, per-agent ownership and approval, usage reporting that can be aggregated or pseudonymised for works-council agreements, and every admin action logged.

Report an error

The Head of IT

Single sign-on and SAML are documented for Team and Enterprise, alongside user management with permissions, company-wide admin controls, an admin API, and audit logs listed among team and enterprise features. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, group-based entitlements to models, agents or connectors, retrieval that respects source-system permissions, or export of audit logs to a SIEM. That covers the sign-in basics but not the governance layer this rollout needs. 11 2

Report an error

Integrations, connectors & knowledge

How this is scored

How the product reaches company knowledge and systems: connectors to file stores, wikis, mail, CRM, ticketing and ERP, how fast and how completely they sync, the API, support for open protocols such as MCP, and how the assistant cites the sources it answers from.

0 — No integrations; users paste text or upload files one at a time.

3 — File upload and one or two connectors (for example a drive), with no API and no statement on sync or citations.

5 — A connector library covering the common file stores, wikis and collaboration tools, answers citing sources, and a documented API.

8 — Connectors to file stores, wikis, mail, CRM and ticketing with incremental sync, custom connectors or MCP support, an API and webhooks for embedding assistants and agents in other tools, and source citations on every grounded answer.

10 — The product sits in the company's systems: read and write connectors with documented scopes, MCP servers and clients, contact-centre or telephony integration where relevant, a knowledge layer that can be audited and corrected, and the data, agents and configuration exportable when the customer leaves.

Report an error

The Head of IT

The product advertises over one hundred connectors plus custom MCP connectors in beta, libraries and document upload with per-user storage limits, project folders, and a coding CLI with connectors, hooks and remote agents. We found no public information on which systems the connectors cover, how fast or completely they sync, or how answers cite their sources — permission-aware SharePoint retrieval is the make-or-break for us, and these pages do not show it. A token-priced API is documented. 2 12

Report an error

Agent capabilities & guardrails

How this is scored

What an agent can actually do and where it stops: multi-step tasks, tool use and actions in other systems, scheduling and triggers, human approval before consequential actions, run logs, evaluation and testing before release, and the limits the vendor states rather than hides.

0 — No agents; the product is a chat window, whatever the marketing says.

3 — Saved prompts or custom assistants with instructions and files, but no actions in other systems and no run history.

5 — Agents that call tools or APIs and run multi-step tasks, built without code, with a log of each run.

8 — Agents that act in connected systems with scoped permissions, human approval configurable per action, triggers and schedules, test and evaluation tooling before release, and documented limits and failure handling.

10 — Agents a business can put in production and account for: versioning and staged rollout, evaluation against test sets, monitoring of quality and cost per agent, handover to a human with full context, every action attributable to the agent and the person who deployed it, and the vendor's own statement of what agents must not be trusted with.

Report an error

The Head of IT

Task scheduling with per-tier limits, skills, workflows, and a remote coding agent mode with observability are in the feature list, and an Agents API exists with its retention stated. We found no public information on human approval gates before consequential actions, evaluation or testing before release, or the limits the vendor states for what agents must not be trusted with. Impressive assistants, but not yet agents I can put in production and account for. 2 5

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where customer data is hosted, and who the subprocessors are — model providers above all, then hosting, search, telephony and email. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; for an AI product the model provider is a subprocessor, so a European interface over a non-European model counts as such.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors (including model providers) unnamed.

3 — A privacy policy exists, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the model providers behind the product are not named as subprocessors.

5 — EU hosting stated and an EU contracting entity, but prompts reach non-EU model providers or other subprocessors without a stated safeguard or EU region.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, every subprocessor listed with its location including model providers, EU inference available, and a DPA offered.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and model processing, every subprocessor European or optional, data export and deletion documented, and a security or certification statement published rather than implied.

Report an error

The Head of IT

The contracting entity is French — Mistral AI, registered in Paris, with a Paris data protection officer and the CNIL named as supervisory authority, French governing law in the standard contractual clauses, and subprocessors audited under signed data protection agreements. But we found no public information on where the product hosts customer data — the only hosting detail the captured pages give is for the marketing website, on Netlify in San Francisco — and the privacy policy acknowledges transfers outside the EU under Article 46 safeguards. A European vendor I can contract with, but residency for my data is not proven here. 3 5 6

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a company can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per seat, per agent, per conversation or per usage unit, what is included in each tier, usage limits and overage, which models, connectors or agents cost extra, minimum seats and term.

0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.

3 — A starting price or "from" figure exists, but usage limits, included models and what scales the cost are unclear.

5 — Prices per tier are public with the main inclusions, but usage limits, overage, agent runs or enterprise features (SSO, audit logs, EU processing) are unpriced or "on request".

8 — Every tier priced publicly with seat or usage units, usage limits and overage rates, add-ons listed, minimum seats and term stated.

10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of seats, agents or conversations, with every usage rate, model surcharge, add-on and support tier and the cancellation and data-return terms published.

Report an error

The Head of IT

Free, Pro at "$14.99 /mo" and Team at "$24.99 /user/mo" are published excluding taxes, with tier limits such as unlimited task scheduling on paid plans, per-user storage, and an API page that prices every model per million tokens in USD or EUR. Enterprise deployments are a contact-sales form, minimum seats and term are unstated, and overage beyond pay-as-you-go credits is unpriced for the assistant itself. I can budget the API; I cannot compute the enterprise bill. 2 9 12

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 Mistral Vibe

Is Mistral Vibe European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Mistral Vibe as EU-Made.

Where does Mistral Vibe store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 26 Oct 2026.

Does Mistral Vibe have a free plan?

Yes. Mistral Vibe has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 26 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Mistral Vibe?

As of 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates Langdock (4/5), Dust (3.5/5) and Unique AI (3.5/5) highest among the other 15 AI Agents & Assistants 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 Langdock (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Mistral Vibe 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 Mistral Vibe? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (12)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage (Vibe, formerly Le Chat) mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing page mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Legal notice mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Legal center with terms of service legal.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Privacy policy legal.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Data processing addendum legal.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Data use, training & retention — found from sitemap help.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Data use, training & retention — found from sitemap help.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Models & processing location — found from sitemap mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Models & processing location — found from sitemap help.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Admin, identity & access controls — found from sitemap help.mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Integrations, connectors & knowledge — found from sitemap mistral.ai Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →