Consent Management (CMP)
consentmanager
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by consentmanager AB · www.consentmanager.net
Compare with Didomi → 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.
consentmanager at a glance
- Vendor
- consentmanager AB
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates consentmanager 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. consentmanager is a consent-management and cookie-banner tool from consentmanager AB in Stockholm; the judges' weighted verdicts land between 4.3 and 5.1. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 29 Oct 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
consentmanager is a consent-management and cookie-banner tool from consentmanager AB in Stockholm; the judges' weighted verdicts land between 4.3 and 5.1. It is strongest on standards and platforms at 5-6 and sovereignty at 5-7: the pages name a Google-certified platform, cover Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers, and list mobile app and connected TV consent, while a European chain is documented — a Swedish entity under Italian parent iubenda, Hamburg and Paris sales companies, hosting with PlusServer GmbH in Cologne, a data processing agreement with all customers as a processor, and named subprocessors with countries and safeguards. Pricing transparency is the weakest criterion at 0-2: a pricing page was captured, but no price, tier, limit or term figure was quotable. Prior blocking, scanning and classification, and consent records sit at 4-5, where developer documentation for automatic blocking, the cookie scanner and a consent log with audit trail is offset by unanswered questions on placeholders, rescan intervals and log retention. The computed review flagged no substantial disagreement between the judges.
Speaks for it
- Google certification for consent collection is stated verbatim, with feature pages on Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers and TCF v2 configuration help
- Consent can be granted or refused per purpose and per third-party provider, changed later, and requested again twelve months after the original choice
- A European chain is on the record: consentmanager AB in Stockholm under Italian parent iubenda, sales companies in Hamburg and Paris, hosting with PlusServer GmbH in Cologne, and a data processing agreement with every customer as processor
- Developer documentation covers automatic blocking of codes and cookies before consent and a consent log protocol with audit trail in English and German
- The module list includes a cookie scanner, a privacy-statement generator, a compliance monitor, mobile app consent and connected TV consent
Held against it
- The captured pricing page gave no quotable figures for prices, tiers, page-view or domain limits, minimum terms or add-ons, so no annual cost can be computed
- We found no public information on whether reject sits on the first banner layer with equal weight, on banner languages or on banner accessibility
- We found no public information on placeholders for videos and maps, tag-manager integration, or a documented way to verify nothing loads before consent
- We found no public information on rescan intervals, a maintained classification database or a cookie declaration that updates itself from the scan
- We found no public information on consent-log contents, retention or export, on CMS plugins or a documented API, or on security certifications and log storage
Best for
- You run advertising or audience measurement and need Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF support, where standards and platforms scored 5-6
- You want a documented European chain — a Stockholm entity under Milan parent iubenda, Cologne hosting, named subprocessors with safeguards — where sovereignty scored 5-7
- You need per-purpose and per-vendor consent with a published consent log protocol and audit trail as your compliance baseline
- You collect consent beyond the web, on mobile apps and connected TV, both listed as product modules
Avoid if
- You must compute an annual cost before committing — pricing transparency scored 0-2 and the captured pricing page gave no quotable figures
- You must produce consent records in a lawsuit or authority audit — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You are answering a regulator's letter that requires first-layer, equally prominent reject — banner and choice ranged 4-6 with that point unanswered
- You rely on a cookie declaration that updates itself from scheduled scans — scanning and classification scored 4-5 with no public information on rescans or self-updating declarations
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Banner & choice architecture | 3 of 5 |
| Prior blocking & script control | 2 of 5 |
| Scanning & cookie classification | 2 of 5 |
| Consent records & proof | 2 of 5 |
| Frameworks, signals & platforms | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 1 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 help centre documents automatic blocking of codes and cookies in a developer reference, together with a getting-started guide on blocking third-party codes and cookies. We found no public information on placeholders for embedded videos or maps, tag-manager or server-side integration, or any documented way to test that nothing loads before consent — precisely the evidence I ask clients for before a regulator asks them. 11 12
The Agency Developer
The developer reference documents automatic blocking of codes and cookies before consent, with a getting-started guide on blocking third-party codes — that is what I need so my team does not hand-edit forty client themes. We found no public information on placeholders for YouTube or Maps embeds, a tag-manager template, or instructions to verify nothing fires before consent. 11 12
The Publisher Marketing Lead
The help centre documents automatic blocking of codes and cookies plus a getting-started guide to blocking third-party codes and cookies, which is the core of what I need before consent. We found no public information on placeholders for videos and embeds, tag-manager templates, server-side tagging or a documented way to verify nothing fires early. 11 12
The In-House Lawyer
The help centre carries a getting-started guide and a developer reference on automatic blocking of codes and cookies, so blocking before consent is a documented capability. We found no public information in the captured facts on placeholders for embedded videos or maps, tag-manager or server-side tagging integration, consent passed to forms and plugins, or a documented way to test that nothing loads too early. 11 12
The WordPress Webmaster
The captured help centre includes developer pages titled automatic blocking of codes and cookies and blocking third-party codes and cookies, which is the direction I need for Analytics, the YouTube embed and the Maps widget, but the confirmed facts go no further. We found no public information on placeholders for videos and maps, tag-manager integration, consent passed to forms and CAPTCHAs, or a documented way to test that nothing loads before consent. 7 8 11 12
The Skeptic
Developer-reference and getting-started pages document automatic blocking of codes and cookies and the blocking of third-party codes, which is more than manual script surgery. We found no public information on content blockers or placeholders for videos and maps, tag-manager integration, or a documented way to verify in the browser that nothing fires before consent — and 'automatic' is a claim until the test steps are published. 11 12
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
A cookie scanner appears in the module list with its own feature pages, and the help centre documents how to classify unknown cookies. We found no public information on scheduled rescans, a maintained database classifying services by purpose, provider and lifetime, or a cookie declaration that updates itself from the scan, which is what keeps a site's cookie list true to what it actually sets. 7 13 14
The Agency Developer
The modules list names a cookie scanner, a compliance monitor and a privacy-policy generator, backed by a dedicated scanner features page and a help article on classifying unknown cookies — so a client's Friday-morning tracker would at least surface for someone to classify. We found no public information on scheduled rescans, a maintained vendor database with purposes and lifetimes, or alerts on new and changed trackers. 2 7 13 14
The Publisher Marketing Lead
A cookie scanner is listed as a core module with its own feature pages, and the help centre addresses how to classify unknown cookies. We found no public information on scan scheduling and depth, coverage of local storage and pixels, or a cookie declaration that updates itself from the scan. 2 7 13 14
The In-House Lawyer
The legal notice lists a cookie scanner, a privacy-statement generator and a compliance monitor among the product's modules, and a help page exists on classifying unknown cookies. The captured facts state nothing on rescan intervals, a maintained database of services with purposes, providers and lifetimes, alerts on new or changed trackers, or a declaration that updates itself from the scan. 7 2 13 14
The WordPress Webmaster
The vendor's own module list includes a cookie scanner, a privacy-statement generator and compliance monitors, so scanning and a generated declaration exist as product parts. We found no public information on scheduled rescans, automatic classification from a maintained database, or alerts on new trackers. 2 7
The Skeptic
A cookie scanner is listed among the product modules with its own product page, and a help page exists on classifying unknown cookies — so unknowns appear to land on the site owner's desk for review rather than being silently sorted. We found no public information on scan frequency or depth, a maintained classification database with purposes, providers and lifetimes, alerts on new trackers, or a self-updating cookie declaration. 7 13 14
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
A consent log protocol with audit trail is documented as a developer reference in both English and German, and the privacy policy states that visitors are asked again twelve months after their settings. We found no public information on what each record contains, how long consent records are kept, whether the banner version shown is preserved with the record, or export of the log — the exact proof my clients' authority demanded of them. 8 15 16
The Agency Developer
There is developer documentation for a consent log protocol with audit trail, in English and German, and the policy confirms visitors are asked again twelve months after their settings. We found no public information on what each record contains, retention of the consent log itself, export of the log, or tying records to the banner version shown. 8 15 16
The Publisher Marketing Lead
Developer documentation of a consent log protocol with audit trail exists in English and German, and the privacy policy states consent is asked again twelve months after the visitor's settings. We found no public information on what each record contains, how long consent logs are kept, or export of the log. 8 15 16
The In-House Lawyer
A developer reference documents the consent log protocol as an audit trail, and the privacy policy states settings can be changed later with consent requested again after twelve months. The captured pages give no information on what each record contains, retention and storage of the consent log, a consent ID the visitor can look up, withdrawal recorded as its own event, or export of the log — exactly what I would have to produce if a consumer group or a competitor sued. 8 15 16
The WordPress Webmaster
The banner asks again twelve months after a visitor's settings, and the captured help centre includes developer pages titled consent log protocol audit trail in both English and German. We found no public information on what each record contains, retention and storage of the consent log, export, or whether records tie back to the banner version shown. 8 15
The Skeptic
A consent log protocol with an audit trail is published in the developer reference in English and German, and the privacy policy states choices are re-asked after twelve months and can be changed at any time. We found no public information on retention or storage location for the consent log, export of records, or a consent ID the visitor can look up — and when I ask what leaving this vendor would cost, the consent log is the first number I want. 15 16 8
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 certification is stated, feature pages cover Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers with configuration guides for TCF v2, and the module list includes mobile app consent and connected TV consent. We found no public information on a registered IAB CMP ID, plugins for named CMS or shop systems, an API, or signals such as GPP or Microsoft UET, which caps the framework picture at the middle tier. 3 4 5 7 17
The Agency Developer
The legal notice states the platform is Google-certified, there is a Consent Mode v2 features page, IAB TCF v2 configuration documented in the help centre, and mobile app and connected-TV consent listed as modules alongside GDPR, Swiss, US and Canadian law solutions. For an agency shop like mine, we found no public information on WordPress, TYPO3 or Shopify plugins, one account managing many client sites, or a JavaScript API that forms and plugins can query for consent. 3 4 5 7 17 18
The Publisher Marketing Lead
This is my home ground: the vendor is named a Google-certified platform, with dedicated pages for Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers including TCF v2 configuration help, and the module list names mobile app consent and connected TV consent. We found no public information on a registered IAB CMP ID, whether Consent Mode v2 advanced mode is supported, GPP or GPC signals for the US, or an API for managing many domains. 3 4 5 7 17 18
The In-House Lawyer
Google certification for consent collection is stated verbatim, and mobile-app consent and connected-TV consent are listed as product modules; feature and help pages cover Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF v2 configuration for publishers. We found no public information in the captured facts on a registered CMP ID, GPP or Global Privacy Control, Microsoft or other ad-platform signals, CMS plugins, multi-domain or agency accounts, or an API. 7 3 4 5 17 18
The WordPress Webmaster
The legal notice confirms a Google-certified platform and lists mobile app consent and connected TV consent as modules, and captured feature pages are titled on Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers. As the one who would install this on our WordPress site, I found no public information on a WordPress or other CMS plugin, a REST API, or managing several domains from one account. 3 4 5 7
The Skeptic
The site describes itself as a Google-certified platform for consent collection, product pages exist for Google Consent Mode v2 and IAB TCF for publishers, TCF v2 configuration is documented in two languages, and mobile app and connected TV consent are listed as modules alongside US state and Canadian law support. We found no public information on a registered IAB Europe CMP ID, Microsoft UET or other ad-platform signals, GPP or GPC, or a documented API and CMS plugins. 7 3 4 5 17 18
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
The chain is largely European: consentmanager AB in Stockholm operates the platform with sales through Hamburg and Paris companies under Italian parent iubenda, hosting is named as PlusServer GmbH in Cologne, a data processing agreement is concluded with every customer, the vendor states it processes no customer data for its own purposes, and named subprocessors carry locations and safeguards such as standard contractual clauses for Stripe. The captured pages do not confirm where the banner script is served from or where consent logs and scan results are stored, and we found no public information on security certifications, so I stop short of the higher marks. 7 8
The Agency Developer
The legal notice and privacy policy are unusually concrete: consentmanager AB in Stockholm as the entity (parent iubenda in Milan), sales through Hamburg and Paris companies, hosting on PlusServer in Cologne, an Auftragsverarbeitungsvertrag concluded with every customer, processing strictly as a processor, and named subprocessors with countries and safeguards such as Stripe in the USA under standard contractual clauses and PayPal in Luxembourg. We found no public information on where the banner script and the consent logs are actually served and stored, or on any ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certification. 7 8
The Publisher Marketing Lead
The chain I can see is European: a Swedish contracting entity under an Italian parent, German and French sales companies, hosting stated with PlusServer in Cologne, a data processing agreement with all customers as a pure processor, and named subprocessors with locations and stated safeguards. We found no public information on where the banner script and consent logs are stored, or on security certifications. 7 8
The In-House Lawyer
The chain that is on the record is European: consentmanager AB in Stockholm owns the product with sales through companies in Hamburg and Paris, the parent iubenda sits in Milan, hosting is named as PlusServer GmbH in Cologne, an order-processing agreement is concluded with every customer, and subprocessors such as Calendly and Stripe are listed with their locations and transfer bases. We found no public information on where the banner script and consent logs are served and stored, on the platform's own CDN, scanner or geolocation providers, or on ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certifications. 7 8
The WordPress Webmaster
A European chain is documented in the vendor's own pages: the Swedish company owns the product with German and French sales companies and an Italian parent, a data processing agreement is concluded with all customers with processing strictly as a processor, hosting is with PlusServer GmbH in Köln, and subprocessors are named with countries and safeguards such as standard contractual clauses for Stripe. We found no public information on where the banner script and consent logs are stored or served from, or on security certifications. 7 8
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is consentmanager AB in Stockholm, a subsidiary of Italy's iubenda, and the privacy policy names PlusServer GmbH in Köln as host, claims processor-only processing, a data processing agreement with every customer, and no sale of data. The named subprocessors — Calendly (USA), Stripe (USA), PayPal (Luxembourg), Creditreform (Germany) — are booking and payment tools, and we found no public information on where the banner script is served from or where consent logs and scan results are stored, so the chain that runs on every visitor's page goes undescribed. Half a sovereignty case: European entity, parent and named host, silence on the rest. 7 8
Pricing transparency
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
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 not rated — no public information
We found no public information on pricing: the captured pricing page gave us no figure for any tier, domain, page-view limit or add-on, so no annual cost can be computed from the public material. This criterion therefore does not count toward my verdict. 6
The Agency Developer
The captured pages include the vendor's own pricing page, but the confirmed facts state no price, tier, traffic limit or scaling rule, so I cannot budget a single client site from what was captured. We found no public information on agency or reseller terms, minimum terms, or what TCF, app SDKs or extra domains cost. 6
The Publisher Marketing Lead
A public pricing page exists and the account area shows self-service orders paid by card or PayPal, but the captured pages state no price per tier, no traffic or domain limits and no scaling rules. I cannot compute the annual cost for my news site and shop from what is public here. 6 8
The In-House Lawyer not rated — no public information
We found no public information on pricing: a pricing page was captured, but no price per domain or licence, tier limits or overage, add-on costs, minimum term or VAT treatment appears in the captured facts, so a buyer cannot compute an annual cost from what we read. 6 1
The WordPress Webmaster not rated — no public information
We found no public information on prices, tiers, page-view limits, minimum terms or VAT treatment — the captured pricing page gave no quotable figures — so I cannot compute an annual cost per site and would have to ask sales. 6
The Skeptic not rated — no public information
We found no public information on pricing: no tier names, prices, page-view or domain limits, overage rules, free tier terms, add-on prices, minimum term or setup fees appear in anything captured, including the pricing page itself. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from what was read. 6 1
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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | 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 | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about consentmanager
Is consentmanager European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies consentmanager as EU-Made.
Where does consentmanager store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026.
Does consentmanager have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to consentmanager?
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: consentmanager 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 — Legal entity, Hosting location. 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.
- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- 163 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
- 24 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
- 13 legal 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
- 8 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
- 4 hosting 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
- 4 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
- 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
- 1 subprocessors 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
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are 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 (18)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (cookie scanner) www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (Google Consent Mode v2) www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (publishers and IAB TCF) www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Features page (mobile apps) www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Pricing page www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Legal notice www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Banner & choice architecture — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Banner & choice architecture — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Prior blocking & script control — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Prior blocking & script control — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Scanning & cookie classification — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Scanning & cookie classification — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Consent records & proof — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 16 Consent records & proof — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 17 Frameworks, signals & platforms — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 18 Frameworks, signals & platforms — found from sitemap www.consentmanager.net Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →