Consent Management (CMP)
Axeptio
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Axeptio · www.axept.io
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.
Axeptio at a glance
- Vendor
- Axeptio
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 29 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Axeptio 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Axeptio, a consent management platform founded in Montpellier, France, earns its best scores on banner and choice 6-7 and standards and platforms 6-7: the captured pages document accept, decline and select on the same level, vendor-by-vendor choice records, native A/B testing scoped by country, language and regulation, Google Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans and a TCF v2.2 widget. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 29 Oct 2026 to 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 30 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Axeptio, a consent management platform founded in Montpellier, France, earns its best scores on banner and choice 6-7 and standards and platforms 6-7: the captured pages document accept, decline and select on the same level, vendor-by-vendor choice records, native A/B testing scoped by country, language and regulation, Google Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans and a TCF v2.2 widget. Consent records score 6, with token, date and vendor-level detail exportable as CSV or JSON. The weak spots are consistent: prior blocking scores 4, because the vendor's own documentation states Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading; sovereignty scores 3, with the legal entity unnamed on static pages and no public information on hosting or subprocessors; and pricing transparency scores 4, since beyond a free tier capped at up to 200 monthly visitors and plans starting at $29/month, nothing shows how cost scales. The captured pages give different statements on script blocking, while scanning and classification spans 4 to 6 as judges weigh the documented scanner and 1,500-vendor catalog against undescribed cookie declarations and tracker alerts.
Speaks for it
- Accept, decline and select sit on the same level, with each visitor's choice recorded vendor by vendor
- Native A/B testing documented with consent rate, opt-in rate and quick bounce rate metrics, scoping by country, language and regulation, and a winner recommendation
- Google Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans, a TCF v2.2 widget, Microsoft UET consent mode and iOS and Android SDKs
- Downloadable consent records carry token, configuration, exact date and vendor-by-vendor detail, exportable as a global CSV or a per-consent JSON
- A free checker audits trackers in 5 minutes with a downloadable PDF and a Google Consent Mode v2 compliance check
Held against it
- The vendor's own documentation states Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading, leaving that logic to the customer (prior blocking scores 4)
- The captured pages give different statements on blocking, the WordPress page saying marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent
- No public information names the legal entity, the hosting of the banner script and consent log, or any subprocessor (sovereignty scores 3)
- Public pricing stops at plans starting at $29/month — visitor bands, extra domains, overage charges, minimum term and VAT treatment are not shown (pricing transparency scores 4)
- API access sits outside the self-serve plans, and no public information covers a registered IAB Europe CMP ID
Best for
- You run an ad-funded or multilingual publication and want to A/B test banners by country, language and regulation
- Your site runs on WordPress or Shopify with Google and Microsoft advertising — Consent Mode v2, Microsoft UET consent mode and the WP Consent API are documented
- You need exportable, vendor-level proof of consent for audits or disputes
- You can condition your own tags on consent and want a free check that nothing fires before it
Avoid if
- You expect the CMP itself to block cookies and third-party scripts before consent — the vendor's documentation states it does not
- Your procurement requires a named contracting entity and a published subprocessor list before signature
- You must budget a full year across traffic bands or multiple domains from public prices
- You need API access within a self-serve plan
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Banner & choice architecture | 3.5 of 5 |
| Prior blocking & script control | 2 of 5 |
| Scanning & cookie classification | 3 of 5 |
| Consent records & proof | 3 of 5 |
| Frameworks, signals & platforms | 3.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 2 of 5 |
Prior blocking & script control
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What happens before the visitor decides: automatic blocking of scripts, pixels, cookies and embedded content until consent is given, content blockers with placeholders for videos, maps and social embeds, integration with tag managers (Google Tag Manager, Matomo Tag Manager) and server-side tagging, consent passed to forms and plugins, and a documented way for the site owner to check that nothing loads too early.
0 — No blocking of any kind; the product only shows a banner and leaves every script running.
3 — Blocking by hand: the site owner changes script tags or tag-manager triggers using the consent state; automatic blocking, embeds and testing are basic or not described.
5 — Automatic blocking of known scripts and cookies before consent, placeholders for embedded videos and maps, a Google Tag Manager template or integration, and the blocking method documented in the help centre.
8 — Blocking described in depth: an auto-blocking mode and a manual mode with their limits explained, content blockers for named services that the vendor maintains, consent passed to forms, CAPTCHAs and plugins through a JavaScript API or events, server-side tagging supported, and instructions to test in the browser or a tag-manager preview that nothing loads before consent.
10 — Prior blocking the site owner can verify: an automated check or monitor that reports scripts and cookies set before consent on the live site, alerts when a new tracker bypasses the banner, blocking covering local storage, fingerprinting and pixels as well as cookies, and the method published so an auditor can follow it.
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages give different statements on blocking: a support article states the tool does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading and that the site owner must manage this logic, while the WordPress page states that marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent. The basic Consent Mode is described as the strictest level, with no data transmitted before the visitor's choice, but conditioning the tags remains the customer's task. A genuine plus is the automated check of whether trackers are triggered before or after consent; we found no public information on placeholders for embedded videos, maps or social embeds. 3 13 6 11
The Agency Developer
The vendor's own support article on cookie blocking states Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading and the customer must manage that logic, and the Consent Mode guide confirms tags must be conditioned on consent in basic mode — while the WordPress plugin page gives a different picture, saying marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent. Consent does reach plugins we maintain: the WordPress plugin feeds the WP Consent API so WooCommerce checks it before setting order cookies, and the free Shake scan checks whether trackers fire before or after consent. We found no public information on content blockers or placeholders for YouTube or Maps embeds, or on a tag-manager template. 3 6 13 11
The Publisher Marketing Lead
The support documentation states that Axeptio does not itself block cookie placement or third-party script loading, that conditioning tags on consent is the customer's job, and that the consent state is transmitted to Google Tag Manager and to WooCommerce via the WP Consent API. The captured pages give different statements here, as the WordPress plugin page says marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent is given. The free Shake checker does scan whether trackers fire before consent, which gives me a way to verify my setup, but maintained automatic blocking, embed placeholders and server-side tagging are not described. 3 6 13 11
The In-House Lawyer
The vendor's own documentation states that Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading and that the customer must manage this logic, with tags conditioned on consent in basic mode and the consent state passed to Google Tag Manager — while the WordPress plugin page describes marketing and analytics scripts not loading until consent, so the captured pages give different pictures of blocking. A free checker does test whether trackers are triggered before or after consent, which is the documented way to verify nothing fires early; we found no public information on content-blocker placeholders for embeds or a monitoring alert on new trackers. 3 6 13 11
The WordPress Webmaster
The captured pages give different figures for blocking: the WordPress plugin page says marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent and the choice is passed to the WP Consent API so WooCommerce holds its order-tracking cookies, while the vendor's own cookie-blocking article states that Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading and the customer must manage that logic, with tags conditioned manually on consent in basic mode. The free Shake audit does check whether trackers fire before or after consent, which is a practical test for my site. I found no public information on content blockers with placeholders for my YouTube embeds or Maps, a Google Tag Manager template, or server-side tagging. 13 3 6 11
The Skeptic
The support article states plainly that Axeptio does not block cookie placement or third-party script loading and the customer must manage that logic, with basic mode requiring tags conditioned on consent by hand and advanced mode loading tags on arrival with anonymised data before any choice. The captured pages give different pictures of script handling, the WordPress page saying marketing and analytics scripts do not load until consent. The free checker that scans whether trackers fire before or after consent is a verification step I respect, but we found no public information on automatic blocking, embed placeholders, or tag-manager preview testing. 3 6 11 13
Scanning & cookie classification
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product knows what the site sets: a scanner that crawls the site for cookies, local storage, pixels and third-party requests, scheduled rescans, a maintained database that classifies cookies and services by purpose, provider and lifetime, alerts on new or changed trackers, and a cookie declaration or policy section that updates itself from the scan.
0 — No scanning and no cookie list; every service is entered and described by the site owner from scratch.
3 — A one-off scan or a list of services the site owner fills in, with some predefined templates; scheduled scans, classification and the declaration are basic or not described.
5 — A scanner that finds cookies and third-party services on the site, regular rescans, automatic classification into categories from a vendor database, and a cookie declaration generated from the result and kept on the site.
8 — Scanning described in depth: scheduled scans with a stated depth or page count, scanning behind logins or in different regions, local storage and pixels as well as cookies, a large maintained database of services with purposes, providers and lifetimes, email alerts on new or changed trackers, and the declaration updated automatically in several languages.
10 — The cookie list stays true without manual work: continuous monitoring of the live site with a change history, unknown trackers flagged for review rather than silently classified, the classification sources and update process published, and scan reports exportable for an audit.
The Data Protection Officer
The scanner automatically detects cookies and trackers on the site, categorises them by purpose, identifies the vendors behind them and can run on a schedule, and a catalogue of over 1,500 vendors feeds the banner configuration built directly from the scan. Reports export as PDF for archiving, and the pre-consent trigger check ties the cookie list to what the site actually does. We found no public information on scan depth, alerts on new trackers, cookie lifetimes in the database, or a self-updating cookie declaration kept on the site. 13 11 2
The Agency Developer
The scanner detects cookies and trackers, categorises them by purpose, identifies the vendors behind them and can be scheduled to keep the list current, with a downloadable PDF report, a Consent Mode v2 compliance check and a pre-consent trigger check; Shake can even generate a banner configuration with services sorted automatically. That covers my Friday-tracker problem partially. We found no public information on alerts when a new tracker appears, on a cookie declaration published on the site from the scan, or on scan depth, storage scanning and cookie lifetimes. 11 13 2
The Publisher Marketing Lead
The scanner automatically detects cookies and trackers, sorts them by purpose, identifies the vendors behind them from video players to social tools, runs on a schedule, exports a PDF report and even generates a ready-to-use banner configuration with a Google Consent Mode v2 compliance check. A catalog of over 1,500 vendors backs the classification. We found no public information on a cookie declaration generated from the scan and kept on the site, on local storage and pixel coverage, or on alerts when trackers change. 11 13 2
The In-House Lawyer
A scanner automatically detects cookies and trackers, categorises them by purpose, identifies the vendors behind them, runs on a schedule and produces a downloadable PDF audit, backed by a catalog of over 1,500 vendors with logos and privacy-policy links. We found no public information on alerts for new or changed trackers, on scan depth or scanning behind logins, or on a cookie declaration that updates itself on the site in several languages. 13 11 2
The WordPress Webmaster
The scanner is documented working: it automatically detects cookies and trackers, identifies the vendors behind them from video players to social widgets, categorises them by purpose, produces a downloadable PDF report, can run on a schedule, and can even generate a starter banner with services sorted by purpose. I found no public information on a cookie declaration kept on the site and updated from the scan, on email alerts when new or changed trackers appear, or on the scan's depth. 13 11 2
The Skeptic
The scanner detects cookies and trackers, categorises them by purpose, identifies the vendors behind them, can run on a schedule, and exports a PDF audit — backed by a catalog of over 1,500 vendors with privacy-policy links. That is a solid scanning core, though we found no public information on local storage or pixel coverage, alerts when trackers change, or a cookie declaration generated from the scan and kept on the site. 2 11 13
Consent records & proof
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the site owner can show afterwards: a record per consent with time, pseudonymous ID, the choices made and the banner version shown, how long records are kept and where, export of the consent log, re-consent when the services or texts change, consent expiry, records available to the visitor (a consent ID), and proof that withdrawal took effect.
0 — No record of consent is kept anywhere; the choice lives only in the visitor's browser.
3 — Consent stored in a cookie with a simple log or counter; per-visitor records, retention, export and banner versions are basic or not described.
5 — A consent log with a record per consent (time, pseudonymous ID, choices), a retention period stated, export of the log as a file, and the banner asking again when the configuration changes.
8 — Proof described in depth: each record tied to the banner version and texts shown, a consent ID the visitor can look up, retention and storage location stated, consent expiry configurable, withdrawal recorded as its own event, cross-domain or cross-device consent recorded consistently, and the log searchable and exportable through an API.
10 — Records built for a dispute: a tamper-evident or audit-proof log, every record reproducible with the exact banner and texts the visitor saw, documentation on how to answer a supervisory authority's request, and the full log exportable in an open format when the customer leaves.
The Data Protection Officer
Every consent is recorded with the token, the product and its configuration, the exact date and the visitor's choice including vendor-by-vendor detail, and refusals are recorded rather than only acceptances; the register can be filtered by period, product and configuration and downloaded as a global CSV or a per-consent JSON. That is the shape of proof I can put in front of a supervisory authority. We found no public information on retention periods, a visitor-side consent lookup, re-consent when texts change, or where the log is stored. 4 1
The Agency Developer
Every consent lands in a register each customer can download at any time: a global CSV with token, product, consent identifier, exact date, the visitor's choice and vendor-by-vendor detail, plus a targeted JSON export for a single consent, filterable by period, product and configuration. Records also tie each consent to its configuration, which is close to banner-version proof. We found no public information on retention periods, storage location, consent expiry, re-consent when texts change, or withdrawal recorded as its own event. 4 7 1
The Publisher Marketing Lead
Every consent lands in a registry with the user token, the configuration shown, the exact date, the accept or refuse outcome and vendor-by-vendor detail, filterable by period, product and configuration, and exportable as a global CSV or a targeted JSON for one specific consent — that is the audit trail I want behind 20 billion proofs of consent. Retention, consent expiry and withdrawal as a recorded event are not described, and the pricing page shows API access outside the self-serve plans. 4 1 7
The In-House Lawyer
A per-consent log records the token, the configuration, the exact date, a granted-or-refused indicator and the visitor's choice vendor by vendor, filterable by period, product and configuration, with a global CSV export and a JSON download for a single consent — the vendor-level detail is what I would want in a dispute with a consumer group. We found no public information on retention periods, storage location, consent expiry, withdrawal recorded as its own event, or export through an API, which the pricing table shows is not part of the self-serve plans. 4 1 7
The WordPress Webmaster
Every customer can open their consent register and download it, with a record per consent carrying a token, the product and configuration, the exact date, the choice accepted or refused, and vendor-by-vendor detail, plus filters by period, product and configuration, a global CSV export and a per-consent JSON export — backed by a claim of 20+ billion proofs of consent. I found no public information on the retention period or storage location, consent expiry, withdrawal recorded as its own event, or an API export, since the comparison table places API access outside the self-serve plans. 4 1 7
The Skeptic
Every consent is viewable with its product, configuration, user token, date and granted-or-refused state, filterable by period, product and configuration, and exportable as a global CSV or a per-consent JSON that includes vendor-by-vendor details — usable proof in a dispute over what a visitor accepted. The configuration field per record hints at version traceability. We found no public information on retention periods, consent expiry, withdrawal being recorded as its own event, or a consent ID the visitor can look up. 1 4
Frameworks, signals & platforms
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the consent goes and where the product runs: the IAB Transparency and Consent Framework (TCF, current version) with a registered CMP ID, Google Consent Mode v2 and Google's CMP certification, Microsoft UET consent mode and other ad-platform signals, the Global Privacy Platform and Global Privacy Control for US laws, plugins and apps for WordPress, Shopify, TYPO3 and other systems, iOS and Android SDKs, connected TV, multi-domain and agency accounts, and an API.
0 — No consent signal is passed on; other tools cannot read the visitor's choice.
3 — Consent readable through a cookie or a JavaScript variable, perhaps one CMS plugin; TCF, Consent Mode, app SDKs and multi-site management are basic or not described.
5 — Google Consent Mode v2 supported with the vendor named as a Google-certified CMP, IAB TCF supported, plugins or integrations for several named CMS and shop systems, a JavaScript API, and several domains manageable from one account.
8 — Signals and platforms described in depth: a registered IAB Europe CMP ID and the current TCF version, Google Consent Mode v2 in basic and advanced mode, Microsoft UET consent mode and other named ad signals, GPP and GPC for US states, iOS and Android SDKs documented, agency or partner accounts managing many client sites, and a REST API for configuration.
10 — One consent across every channel: web, apps and connected TV under one configuration, consent shared across domains and logged-in devices, every signal (TCF, Consent Mode, GPP, ad platforms) documented with its mapping to the banner choices, and configuration exportable or managed as code.
The Data Protection Officer
Google Consent Mode v2 in basic and advanced mode with Gold status in Google's CMP Partner Program, Microsoft UET consent mode, a TCF v2.2 widget with setup documentation, Global Privacy Control, iOS and Android SDKs, WordPress and Shopify apps with a WP Consent API bridge, and an agency offering cover the channels a mid-sized company actually uses. API access sits outside the self-serve plans, which restricts automation for ordinary buyers. We found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID, the Global Privacy Platform, or connected TV. 6 2 5 13 12 1 7
The Agency Developer
TCF v2.2 widgets are documented with setup guides, Google Consent Mode v2 comes in basic and advanced mode with the vendor a gold member of Google's CMP Partner Program, Microsoft UET consent mode has its own configuration guide, and GPC appears among supported regulations, alongside iOS and Android SDKs, a WordPress plugin on wordpress.org and a Shopify app — that covers most of my stack, though not TYPO3. An agency plan and an 'Axeptio for Agencies' track exist for multi-client work. We found no public information on a registered IAB CMP ID, GPP or connected TV, and API access appears gated out of the self-serve plans. 5 6 2 13 12 7
The Publisher Marketing Lead
For an ad-funded newsroom this is close to my shopping list: a widget compliant with IAB Europe's TCF v2.2, gold membership of Google's CMP Partner Program, Google Consent Mode v2 in both basic and advanced mode with automatic signal transmission, Microsoft UET Consent Mode, GPC, and iOS and Android SDKs. WordPress and Shopify plugins plus 20-plus native integrations cover our stack, and there is an agency offering. But no registered CMP ID is stated, GPP is not named, the REST API sits outside the self-serve plans, and consent shared between the website and the app is not described. 5 2 6 12 13 7 1
The In-House Lawyer
The signal coverage is documented in depth: an IAB Europe TCF v2.2 widget with step-by-step configuration guides, Gold membership in Google's CMP Partner Program, Google Consent Mode v2 in basic and advanced mode, Microsoft UET consent mode with its own guide, Global Privacy Control listed among supported regulations, plus WordPress and Shopify plugins, 20+ native integrations, iOS and Android SDKs and an offering for agencies. We found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID number, on GPP, or on a documented REST API for configuration. 5 6 2 12 13 1
The WordPress Webmaster
Google Consent Mode v2 is supported in both basic and advanced mode with automatic signal transmission, gold membership in Google's CMP Partner Program, a TCF v2.2 widget with setup articles included in the paid self-serve plans, Microsoft UET consent mode with its own configuration guide, GPC among the listed regulations, iOS and Android SDKs, and a WordPress plugin on WordPress.org that documents cache-plugin settings for WP Rocket, LiteSpeed and others plus the WP Consent API. For a shop site there is also a one-click Shopify app. I found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID, the Global Privacy Platform, or a REST API available in the self-serve plans. 6 2 7 13 5 12
The Skeptic
TCF v2.2 has its own setup articles, the vendor is a gold member of Google's CMP Partner Program with Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans and both basic and advanced modes documented, and Microsoft UET consent mode, GPC, iOS and Android SDKs, WordPress and Shopify plugins and the WP Consent API round out the picture. I want the registered IAB Europe CMP ID to verify the TCF claim, and we found no public information on it, on GPP, or on connected TV; API access sits outside the self-serve plans. 1 5 6 7 13
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where the banner script is served from, where consent logs and scan results are stored, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, CDN, geolocation, scanner infrastructure, app SDK telemetry, email and support). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; a CMP runs on every page of the customer's site and sees every visitor, so the whole chain counts, not only the database. For a plugin that runs on the customer's own server, the vendor's licence, update and scanner services are the chain.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (CDN for the banner script, geolocation, scanner, analytics, support) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, banner script and consent logs served and stored in the EU, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting, CDN and every subprocessor, or a self-hosted option that keeps the banner and the logs on the customer's own server; data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Data Protection Officer
A data processing agreement is published and the company was founded in Montpellier, which supports a European chain, but no captured page names the contracting entity, the hosting location for the banner script and the consent log, or a single subprocessor. For a widget that sees every visitor on every page, that gap is what I would press before signature, and the legal notice itself is only reachable through the vendor's own consent widget. No security certification is stated either. 1 8 13
The Agency Developer
Axeptio was founded in Montpellier and a data processing agreement is published, which is as far as the captured pages take it. We found no public information on the contracting entity — the legal notice opens only through the vendor's own consent widget — nor on where the banner script, consent logs or scan results are hosted, or on subprocessors and security certifications. For a script that runs on every page of every client site, that chain stays dark. 8 1 13
The Publisher Marketing Lead
A data processing agreement is published and the company has French roots, founded in Montpellier and operating since 2017. Beyond that we found no public information on the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, where the banner script and consent logs are hosted, or the subprocessors in the chain — and a CMP sits on every page of my sites, so that whole chain matters to me. 1 13 12 8
The In-House Lawyer
A privacy policy and a data processing agreement are published, and the about page gives a founding in Montpellier, France — but the contracting entity is not named on any static page of the vendor's site, whose legal notice opens only through the vendor's own consent widget, which I cannot verify for a contract. We found no public information on where the banner script (described as served from an unnamed CDN) or the consent records are hosted, on ownership, or on any subprocessors. 1 8 13
The WordPress Webmaster
A privacy policy and a Data Processing Agreement are published, and the about page places the company's origins in Montpellier, France, with operation since 2017. I found no public information on the legal entity, where the banner script and consent logs are stored, the hosting, or any subprocessor list — the legal notice on the site even opens only through the vendor's own consent widget. No security certifications are named on the captured pages. 1 8 13
The Skeptic
A Data Processing Agreement is published and the about page places the founding in Montpellier, but the legal entity is not named on any static page — the legal notice opens only through the vendor's own consent widget, an irony I intend to remember. We found no public information on where the banner script's CDN, the consent logs or the scan results are hosted, or who the subprocessors are. 1 8 13
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per domain or site licence, the page-view, session or consent limits of each tier and what happens above them, the free tier's limits, which features (TCF, app SDKs, A/B testing, multi-domain, white label) cost extra, agency or reseller terms, minimum term, and setup.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with domains, traffic or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per domain or licence and their main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (traffic overage, extra domains, TCF, app SDKs, agency use) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (per domain, per page view or session band, per site licence), overage and extra domains priced, add-ons listed with prices, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of domains, traffic and apps, with every add-on, setup, support, overage and agency fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Data Protection Officer
The free tier is clearly capped at up to 200 monthly visitors and includes Google Consent Mode v2, paid plans start at $29/month, and a 10% annual discount is shown. Beyond that entry point the captured pages do not show per-domain pricing, overage charges, minimum term or VAT treatment, so a buyer cannot compute a real annual cost. Feature placement is partly visible, with TCF in self-serve paid plans and API access only above them. 12 13 7
The Agency Developer
Public pages show a free tier capped at 200 monthly visitors, paid plans starting at $29 a month, a 10% annual discount, and a comparison table that places features by plan — Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans, TCF in paid plans, the consent register in the agency plan. We found no public information on how cost scales beyond the entry price: visitor bands, per-domain pricing, overage, agency or reseller terms, minimum term or VAT treatment. 12 7 13 1
The Publisher Marketing Lead
A free tier capped at 200 monthly visitors and paid plans starting at $29/month are public, with a 10% annual discount and visible feature gating: TCF in the self-serve paid plans, the consent registry under the agency plan, and API access not in the self-serve plans. How cost scales with traffic, extra domains or the mobile SDKs is not stated on the captured pages, so I cannot compute the annual cost for our page views from public information alone. 7 12 13 1
The In-House Lawyer
The free tier's limit (up to 200 monthly visitors) and the paid entry point ($29/month) are public, with a 10% annual discount and a plan comparison showing where Google Consent Mode v2, TCF, the consent log and API access sit — TCF in paid self-serve plans, the consent log in the agency plan, API access not in self-serve. We found no public information on how the price scales with traffic or number of domains, on overage charges, minimum term, VAT treatment, or agency and setup fees, so I could not compute the annual cost for a three-country retail footprint. 7 12 13
The WordPress Webmaster
The free plan's limit is public — up to 200 monthly visitors including Google Consent Mode v2 — paid plans are stated to start at $29/month, annual billing takes 10% off, and the pricing page shows which plans carry TCF, the consent register and API access. I found no public information on how cost scales with traffic or the number of domains above the free tier, overage and extra-domain prices, the minimum term, VAT treatment or agency terms, so I cannot compute my annual cost for one WordPress site from the captured pages alone. 7 12 13 10
The Skeptic
Public: a free tier capped at up to 200 monthly visitors, paid plans starting at $29/month, 10% off annual billing, and a comparison table showing Google Consent Mode v2 in all self-serve plans and TCF in the paid ones. But we found no public information on tier prices beyond that starting point, per-tier visitor limits and overage charges, extra domains, agency terms or minimum terms — so a buyer cannot compute the annual cost from these pages. 7 10 12
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Axeptio
Is Axeptio European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Axeptio as EU-Made.
Where does Axeptio store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Axeptio have a free plan?
Yes. Axeptio has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 29 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Axeptio?
As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Usercentrics CMP (3.5/5), Didomi (3.5/5) and CCM19 (3.5/5) highest among the other 19 Consent Management (CMP) 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 Usercentrics CMP (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Axeptio alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data processing agreement. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- 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.
- 29 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
- 5 compliance 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
- 3 integrations 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
- 2 data 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
- 2 pricing 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 legal 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 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. 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 (14)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (cookie banner) www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Documentation (cookie blocking) support.axeptio.eu Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Documentation (consent register) support.axeptio.eu Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Documentation (IAB TCF) support.axeptio.eu Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Documentation (Google Consent Mode) support.axeptio.eu Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Pricing page www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 About page www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Banner & choice architecture — found from sitemap www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Banner & choice architecture — found from sitemap www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Scanning & cookie classification — found from sitemap www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Frameworks, signals & platforms — found from sitemap www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Frameworks, signals & platforms — found from sitemap www.axept.io Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Code repository (open-source licence) — found from the homepage github.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →