Content Marketing
Storyblok
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Storyblok GmbH · www.storyblok.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Storyblok at a glance
- Vendor
- Storyblok GmbH
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 1 Oct 2026
- Starting price
- “Monthly price if billed monthly: Free Includes 1 team member seat, add 1 more user at 15,00 €/month” (vendor’s words) source, captured 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Storyblok 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Storyblok is a subscription-based headless CMS with a visual editor, listed as Storyblok GmbH of Linz, Austria. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Oct 2026 to 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Storyblok is a subscription-based headless CMS with a visual editor, listed as Storyblok GmbH of Linz, Austria. The strongest clusters are distribution and integrations and pricing transparency, both 7-8: a publicly documented GraphQL API with a stated rate limit of 100 points per second, webhooks, an app directory, a status page, per-plan uptime SLAs, and published per-unit rates such as 15,00 €/month each additional user and 20,00 €/month per additional locale — though no headline base plan price was found. Content model and reuse and collaboration and approval sit at 6-7. The weak spots are editorial planning, 2-4, where no public information was found on an editorial calendar, briefs or campaign grouping beyond a gated webinar, and sovereignty, 1-3. That range is a genuine split: the data protection reviewer scored 1, finding no stated hosting region for customer content, while the other scores sit at 3, weighing the Austrian listing and a European Union delivery region among five. AI and content rights spans 4-6 on unanswered questions about training, processing location and retention.
Speaks for it
- Publicly documented, versioned GraphQL delivery API with a published rate limit of 100 points per second, status code 429 handling, a playground, documented webhooks, an app directory, a public status page and per-plan uptime SLAs from 97 to 99.99 percent.
- Publishing is gated to the Ready to Publish stage, with per-stage edit and publish permissions, per-language publication status and an Approval app recording email sign-off after a changelog review.
- Structured content model with nestable blocks, reference fields between entries, datasources for shared terminology and component schemas inherited from a parent space across sites.
- Self-service plans Starter, Growth and Growth Plus publish per-unit overage rates: 15,00 €/month each additional user, 20,00 €/month per additional locale, 10,00 €/month per 1M API requests, 75,00 €/month for each 250GB extra and 20,00 €/month per 200k AI credits.
- AI providers and exact models are named across OpenAI, Google Gemini and Anthropic Claude, with AI features switchable per space or organization, customer-supplied credentials possible and usage history filterable by provider, feature, user and space.
Held against it
- No public information found on an editorial calendar, on briefs carrying goal, audience and keywords, or on grouping work into campaigns or topics — the campaign evidence is a webinar session, not product documentation.
- No public information found on where customer content, assets and backups are hosted, on a subprocessor list with locations and purposes, or on a DPA, with AWS named as datacenter and no region stated.
- No public information found on whether customer content trains the named AI models, where prompts are processed, or how long prompts and outputs are retained.
- No public information found on a documented, self-service export of content, model, locales and assets together, or on named connectors to translation services.
- No public information found on mandatory named reviewers, on scheduled publishing that waits for approval, or on freelancer access limited to assigned pieces.
Best for
- You build marketing sites on a headless stack and want documented delivery — a GraphQL API, webhooks and framework support including Next.js, Astro, Nuxt, React, Vue, Symfony and Angular.
- You run multilingual content and need each translated story to carry its own publication status, with unlimited locales available at 20,00 €/month per additional locale.
- You need to forecast costs before committing — seat, traffic, API-request, locale and AI-credit overage rates are published per unit.
- You want nothing published without review — only stories at the Ready to Publish stage can go live, with sign-off recorded by email against the changelog.
Avoid if
- You must keep AI-assisted content processing inside the EU — the named AI providers are OpenAI, Google Gemini and Anthropic Claude, and the delivery regions include the United States, Canada, Australia and China alongside the European Union.
- Your planning runs on editorial calendars and campaign briefs — the captured campaign material is a webinar series and workflow stages offer assignment and due dates rather than a calendar.
- You need a published price for custom roles and workflows, SSO and SCIM — the Enterprise Premium and Elite tiers are sold as fully customized consumption.
- You expect to outgrow a Starter plan — it includes 100GB traffic per month with no additional traffic available.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Planning, editorial calendar & briefs | 2 of 5 |
| Creation, review & approval | 3.5 of 5 |
| Structured content, localisation & export | 3 of 5 |
| Publishing, distribution & integrations | 3.5 of 5 |
| AI assistance & content rights | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 3.5 of 5 |
Planning, editorial calendar & briefs
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Turning a content strategy into scheduled work: topics and campaigns, an editorial calendar across channels, briefs that carry the goal, audience and keywords to the writer, and a view of what is due, late or missing.
0 — No planning features; content is created as standalone entries with no calendar, status or owner.
3 — A shared calendar with publish dates and simple statuses, but no briefs, no campaigns or topics to group work under, and no notion of who owns a piece.
5 — An editorial calendar across channels with owners, due dates and custom statuses, briefs attached to each piece, and content grouped by campaign or topic cluster.
8 — Strategy is connected to the plan: topics or personas defined once and assigned to pieces, configurable workflows per content type, workload and deadline views per person, and recurring formats scheduled as series.
10 — The plan is accountable: every published piece traces back to its brief, topic and campaign, gaps in coverage per topic or funnel stage are reported, and plan-versus-published is visible over time without a spreadsheet.
The Head of Content
Workflow stages carry a due date, an assigned person or role and email notification, and single-story scheduling plus release management give me the bones of a plan — but we found no public information on an editorial calendar, on briefs that carry goal, audience and keywords to the writer, or on grouping work by campaign or topic. The only campaign material we found is the vendor's own webinar series, which is marketing, not a product feature. 6 8 2
The SME Marketer
Stories carry workflow stages with an assigned person or role, a due date and email notice, and single-story scheduling appears on the growth plans, but we found no public information on an editorial calendar, on briefs that carry goal, audience and keywords to the writer, or on grouping work under campaigns or topics. The campaign material we found is a webinar session, not a product feature. 6 8 2
The Localisation Lead
Workflows let you assign a person or role with a due date and per-stage statuses, single-story scheduling exists, and an Ideation Room drafts articles — but we found no public information on an editorial calendar across channels, briefs carrying goal, audience and keywords, or campaigns and topic clusters as product features; the Campaign House appears in a marketing session, not in product documentation. 6 8 2 13
The Web Engineer
Workflows carry stage-level due dates, assignees and email notifications, and an AI Ideation Room drafts and improves article ideas, but the campaign material captured is an on-demand webinar session rather than a product capability. We found no public information on an editorial calendar, on briefs carrying goal, audience and keywords, or on grouping work under campaigns or topics inside the product. 8 13 6
The Data Protection Officer
Workflow stages with an assigned person or role, per-stage due dates and email notification give some notion of ownership and what is due, and an AI ideation room supports drafting articles; we found no public information on an editorial calendar, briefs carrying goal, audience and keywords, or grouping work into campaigns or topics — the campaign references on the captured pages describe a webinar series rather than product features. 8 2 13 6
The Skeptic
The planning evidence is a gated on-demand webinar about campaigns and a 'Campaign House' framework, not product capability: we found no public information on an editorial calendar, on briefs, or on grouping work by campaign or topic. The product itself shows an Ideation Room for drafting articles and workflow stages where a person or role can be assigned with a due date — ownership of a stage, not a plan. 6 8 13
Creation, review & approval
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Writing and reviewing content together: editing with comments and suggestions, roles and permissions for internal and external contributors, and an approval trail that records who released which version.
0 — Single-user editing with no comments, no roles beyond admin, and no record of changes.
3 — Comments and a version history exist, but every user can publish, external writers need a full seat, and approval is a status anyone can set.
5 — Roles that separate writing from publishing, inline comments and suggested edits, a version history with restore, and guest or freelancer access limited to assigned pieces.
8 — Configurable multi-step approval per content type or market, mandatory reviewers (legal, product, brand), scheduled publishing that waits for approval, and an audit log of every edit, approval and publish with user and timestamp.
10 — Approval is evidence: the exact version each approver released is preserved and exportable, permissions reach down to field and locale level, and the audit trail is retained for a stated period and available after the contract ends.
The Head of Content
Publishing is genuinely gated: only stories at the Ready to Publish stage can go live, stages carry their own edit and publish permissions, and the Approval app records email sign-off against a reviewable changelog, with custom roles and audit trails listed for the top tiers. What I cannot find is the thing legal asks me for — we found no public information on mandatory named reviewers per content type or market, on a preserved and exportable record of exactly which version each approver released, or on freelancer access limited to assigned pieces. 1 7 8 2
The SME Marketer
Workflows are configurable per stage — who may edit and publish, the default stage per content type, automatic progression — with per-language stages, email approval requests, changelog review before sign-off, and enterprise tiers advertising audit trails. We found no public information on inline suggested edits, version restore, or guest and freelancer access limited to assigned pieces. 1 7 8 2
The Localisation Lead
Multi-stage workflows with per-stage edit and publish permissions, an approval app that signs off changes by email after a changelog review, and language-based workflows holding an individual publication status per translated story go well past basic commenting — exactly what a German–English–French desk needs. We found no public information on mandatory reviewers, on scheduled publishing that waits for approval, or on an audit log of every edit, approval and publish with user and timestamp beyond an enterprise-marketing bullet. 1 7 8 2
The Web Engineer
Configurable multi-stage workflows define who may edit and publish per stage, publishing is gated to the final stage, and an approval app records email sign-off with a changelog review of the change, alongside SSO, SCIM and audit trails named at the enterprise tier. We found no public information on mandatory reviewers such as legal or brand, on scheduled publishing that waits for approval, or on preserved and exportable approval versions after the contract ends. 8 7 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Multi-stage workflows are configurable per content type and per language, with stage-level edit and publish permissions, email approval requests, changelog review before sign-off and a history of workflow changes, and only stories at Ready to Publish can be published; we found no public information on mandatory reviewers, publishing scheduled to wait for approval, or an audit log recording user and timestamp — the audit-trail claim appears only as a homepage phrase tied to enterprise plans. 7 8 1 2
The Skeptic
The workflow engine is real: a default Drafting, Reviewing, Ready to Publish flow with per-stage rules on who can edit and publish, custom workflows on higher plans, per-language publication status, and comments recorded at each stage change. Approval arrives through an app that emails an Approve action and lets reviewers read the changelog first; we found no public information on mandatory reviewers, on scheduled publishing that waits for approval, or on freelancer access limited to assigned pieces, and 'audit trails' appears once as an enterprise claim without detail. 7 8 1 2
Structured content, localisation & export
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether content is stored as reusable structure rather than pages: a content model, components shared across channels, German and other locales managed side by side, and the whole repository exportable in a documented format.
0 — Content stored as formatted pages with no structure, one language per entry, and no export beyond copy and paste.
3 — Custom fields or templates exist, but localisation means duplicating entries, assets live elsewhere, and the only export is HTML or a CSV of titles.
5 — A configurable content model with reusable components, field-level localisation with fallback languages, a media library with alt text, and an export of entries and assets in JSON or a similar documented format.
8 — References between entries, variants per market or audience, translation workflows with status per locale and connectors to translation services named, and a full export of content, model, locales and assets documented and self-service.
10 — The repository is portable by design: model and content exportable together and re-importable, migration tooling or a CLI documented in both directions, version history included in the export, and no feature that only works while the content stays.
The Head of Content
The model is the strong suit: fields, blocks and stories with reference fields between entries, component schemas maintained once in a parent space and inherited by other spaces, datasources for shared terminology, and language-based workflows that track publication status per translated story. Delivery is JSON everywhere, but we found no public information on a documented self-service export of content, model and assets together, or on migration tooling in both directions. 2 8 9 10
The SME Marketer
Content is genuinely structured — components, blocks, stories, reference fields between entries, datasources for a shared glossary, and component definitions inherited from a parent space across sites — with per-language publication status and AI translations in dozens of languages. We found no public information on field-level fallback languages, market variants, connectors to named translation services, or a documented export of the whole repository; the JSON we found is the delivery format, not an export. 2 8 9 10
The Localisation Lead
Fields, blocks and stories with nestable components, reference fields between entries, shared component schemas across spaces and datasources for a consistent glossary give real structure, and locales are first-class: language-based workflows track the publication status of each translated story, AI translates into dozens of languages, and additional locales are priced per locale. We found no public information on field-level localisation with fallback languages, variants per market, named connectors to translation services, or a documented self-service export of content, model and locales together, so a documented way to take the whole repository out is not evidenced. 8 9 10 13 2
The Web Engineer
Fields, blocks and stories with nestable reusable components, reference fields linking entries, datasources for consistent terminology, shared component inheritance across spaces, and language-based workflows tracking publication status per translated story make the model genuinely structured. We found no public information on a documented, self-service export of content, model, locales and assets, on named translation-service connectors, or on fallback languages. 9 10 8 13
The Data Protection Officer
A documented model of fields, blocks and stories with nestable reusable components, reference fields between entries, datasources for shared terminology and component schemas inherited from a parent space is genuine structure, with per-language publication statuses and AI translations for localisation; we found no public information on variants per market, connectors to named translation services, or a documented self-service export of content, model and assets — portability rests on a JSON-delivery claim. 9 10 8 13 2
The Skeptic
The model side is strong: nestable blocks, reference fields linking entries, datasources for consistent terms, component schemas inherited from a parent space across sites, and language-based workflows giving each locale its own publication status. Portability, my test, rests on one homepage line about content that goes anywhere without being rebuilt plus JSON delivery; we found no public information on a documented export of content, model, locales and history together, on fallback languages, or on named connectors to translation services. 1 9 10 8
Publishing, distribution & integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting approved content to where it is read: publishing to websites and channels, a documented API and webhooks, and named connections to the CMS, CRM, analytics, SEO and translation tools a marketing stack already runs.
0 — Content leaves only by copy and paste; no API, no webhooks and no named integrations.
3 — Publishing to one CMS through a plugin, a handful of named integrations, and an API that is mentioned but not publicly documented.
5 — Publishing to websites and several channels from one place, a publicly documented REST or GraphQL API, webhooks on publish and change, and integrations named for at least the common CMS, CRM and analytics tools.
8 — A versioned API with published rate limits and SDKs, preview environments, a marketplace or integration directory with maintained connectors, performance data per piece pulled back from analytics, and a public status page.
10 — The platform is a dependable source for every channel: API deprecation policy published, CDN and delivery SLA stated, scheduled and event-driven publishing documented end to end, and content performance attributed per channel without a separate tool.
The Head of Content
A versioned, publicly documented GraphQL API with a published rate limit of 100 points per second and a documented webhooks API, plus an app directory, preview spaces, per-plan uptime commitments and a public status page. What keeps it short of a dependable source for every channel: we found no public information on performance data pulled back per piece from analytics, and beyond Shopify and the framework SDKs the captured pages name few specific connectors. 1 9 11 12 2
The SME Marketer
The GraphQL API is publicly documented with versioning, a 100-points-per-second rate limit and a playground, webhooks cover default events and workflow stage changes, and there is an app directory, mobile SDKs, preview spaces, a public status page and per-plan uptime SLAs from 97 to 99.99 percent. We found no public information on performance data per piece pulled back from analytics, or on an API deprecation policy. 1 11 12 2
The Localisation Lead
A documented, versioned GraphQL delivery API with published rate limits and a public playground, documented webhook endpoints with default events, an app directory, framework support with mobile SDKs, a public status page and delivery availability commitments in the terms cover most of a distribution stack. We found no public information on performance data per piece pulled back from analytics, and the terms' 30-day breaking-change notice is the nearest published statement to a deprecation policy. 1 5 11 12 2
The Web Engineer
Public GraphQL documentation covers two API versions, a published rate limit of 100 points per second with 429 retry behaviour and a playground, webhooks are documented as endpoints listening to default events, and there is an app store, open-source SDKs, a preview space, a public status page and per-plan uptime SLAs, with the terms promising 30 days' notice and a termination remedy on breaking changes. We found no public information on per-piece performance data pulled back from analytics or a CDN delivery SLA. 11 12 1 2 5 9
The Data Protection Officer
A documented, versioned GraphQL API with a published rate limit of 100 points per second and status code 429 handling, webhooks on content events, an app directory with named integrations such as Shopify, SDKs and a public status page cover most of a delivery stack, with uptime commitments stated in the terms; we found no public information on per-piece performance data pulled back from analytics, and preview is evidenced as a testing space rather than delivery preview environments. 11 12 1 2 9
The Skeptic
Publicly documented GraphQL with a stated rate limit of 100 points per second and a 429 response when exceeded, an API playground, management endpoints to create and delete webhooks, an app directory, named frameworks plus a Shopify integration, a status page, per-plan uptime SLAs and 30 days' notice of breaking changes make a credible delivery story. We found no public information on performance data per piece being pulled back from analytics, which is what keeps this out of the top band. 1 11 12 2 5
AI assistance & content rights
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the platform's AI does with the customer's content and what the customer may do with the AI's: the models and where they run, whether content trains them, opt-out, labelling of generated text, and who holds the rights to output.
0 — AI writing features with no statement on which model is used, where content is sent, or whether it is used for training.
3 — An AI page that names a provider but leaves open whether customer content trains models, where prompts are processed, or whether the features can be switched off.
5 — The model providers named as subprocessors, customer content excluded from training stated in the terms, AI features switchable per workspace by an admin, and ownership of generated output assigned to the customer.
8 — EU processing for AI features stated or selectable, retention of prompts and outputs given in days, generated or AI-edited content markable for EU AI Act transparency, and brand voice or terminology rules applied without uploading content to train a shared model.
10 — AI is governed and documented: per-feature list of model, provider and processing location, admin controls per role and content type, an audit trail of AI-generated changes, and the output rights and any indemnity written into the contract terms.
The Head of Content
Credit where due: three model providers with named models, an admin switch at space or organization level, the option to bring your own credentials, and usage history filterable by provider, feature, user and space. But the questions my legal team will ask go unanswered — we found no public information on whether customer content trains the models, where prompts are processed or how long they are retained, on EU processing for AI features, or on marking generated content for EU AI Act transparency. 5 13 13
The SME Marketer
The AI pages name the models and providers — OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude — let admins switch AI on or off per space or organization, apply brand-voice rules in natural language, and track usage by provider, feature and user. But the captured pages give no statement on whether my drafts train these models, where prompts are processed, or who owns generated output; the terms point to an AI terms page, yet nothing from it appears in the captures. 5 13 13
The Localisation Lead
Providers and exact models are published (OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude), admins can switch AI features on or off at space or organisation level, usage history is filterable by provider, feature, user and space, and the terms give the customer ownership of customer content plus an infringement indemnity. We found no public information on whether customer content trains the models, where prompts are processed, retention of prompts and outputs in days, or marking generated content for EU AI Act transparency. 5 13 13
The Web Engineer
Model and provider choices are published per feature with named OpenAI, Google Gemini and Anthropic Claude models, admins switch AI on at space or organization level, customers can supply their own credentials, brand-voice output rules and usage history filterable by user and feature exist, and the terms state customer content is owned by the customer. We found no public information on whether customer content trains the models, where prompts are processed, retention of prompts and outputs, or EU AI Act labelling of generated text. 13 13 5
The Data Protection Officer
Providers and models are named exhaustively — OpenAI, Google Gemini and Anthropic Claude — with admin switchability at space or organization level, customer-supplied credentials and usage history filterable by user and feature; we found no public information on whether customer content is excluded from model training, on retention of prompts and outputs in days, on the processing location, or on EU AI Act labelling of generated text, and output ownership is not explicitly assigned beyond the general customer-content ownership clause. 13 13 5
The Skeptic
Model providers are named to the exact model across OpenAI, Google Gemini and Anthropic Claude, admins enable AI features per space or organization, credits are metered by token cost, and usage history filters by provider, feature, user and space — more disclosure than most. The clauses I read for are missing: we found no public information on whether customer content trains these models, on where prompts are processed or retained for how long, on labelling of generated text, or on output rights beyond the general statement that customer content is owned by the customer. 13 13 5
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity is, where content, assets and AI prompts are stored and processed, and which subprocessors touch them. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Non-EU contracting entity, no statement on where content is hosted, and subprocessors unnamed.
3 — Content hosted in the EU on request or on a higher plan only, or the subprocessor list is absent, or AI and analytics features send content outside the EU without an explained safeguard.
5 — EU hosting stated for content and assets, a DPA available, but the contracting entity or significant parts of the chain (CDN, AI, support) are non-EU without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU contracting entity, content, assets and backups stored in the EU on named infrastructure, subprocessor list published with locations and purposes, and AI processing location stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity, every hosting, CDN, AI and support subprocessor European or optional, self-hosting or a European cloud offered, and certifications published.
The Head of Content
The contracting entity is Storyblok GmbH in Linz, and the GraphQL delivery regions include a European Union option alongside the United States, Canada, Australia and China. Beyond that it goes quiet: AWS is named as the datacenter with no region stated, and we found no public information on a published subprocessor list, a DPA, data residency for content and assets, or certifications — while the named AI providers are US companies with the processing location unstated. 3 4 11 13
The SME Marketer
The provenance line names an Austrian company, but the captured pages state no hosting location for customer content — AWS appears as a datacenter without a stated region — and we found no public information on a published subprocessor list, the contracting entity's jurisdiction, or where AI prompts are processed. The delivery API does list a European Union region among its options. 3 11 13
The Localisation Lead
The provenance names Storyblok GmbH of Linz and the GraphQL delivery regions include a European Union option, but the captured pages state no location for customer content, assets and backups, no subprocessor list with locations and purposes beyond AWS as datacenter, and no processing location or safeguard for the non-EU AI providers named. That is the level where the subprocessor picture is absent and AI processing sits outside the EU without an explained safeguard. 3 11
The Web Engineer
The captured pages name AWS as datacenter for log files, US AI providers for AI features, and delivery regions spanning the European Union, the United States, Canada, Australia and China, while we found no public information on where customer content and backups are hosted, on a subprocessor list with locations and purposes, or on a DPA. An Austrian registration appears in the vendor information, but the vendor's own captured pages did not confirm the contracting entity's jurisdiction. 3 13 11
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages state no hosting region for customer content, assets or AI prompts, publish no subprocessor list and name no DPA, while the AI model providers are non-European with no processing-location statement; the only European signal is the EU as one of five selectable delivery regions, and the contracting entity is not confirmed on the vendor's own captured pages. 3 11 13
The Skeptic
The vendor is listed as Storyblok GmbH of Linz, Austria, but the privacy policy names AWS as its datacenter and the delivery regions span the EU, United States, Canada, Australia and China; we found no published subprocessor list with locations and purposes. AI prompts go to OpenAI, Google and Anthropic by default with no stated EU processing option, and we found no public information on where customer content and backups are stored. 3 11 13
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the annual cost for their team, locales and traffic from public pages alone — seats and contributor roles, locales, content records, API calls and bandwidth, AI credits, and the plan where approval workflows or SSO begin.
0 — No public prices at all; every plan is a sales conversation.
3 — A starting price per month, but what it includes is vague and the limits that drive the real cost (locales, records, API calls, AI credits) are unstated.
5 — Plans priced per seat with their main limits listed, but at least one commonly incurred cost (extra locales, overage on records or API calls, AI credits, guest contributors) is missing or "on request".
8 — Every plan priced with seats, locales, records, API and bandwidth limits and overage rates stated, AI usage priced or included explicitly, and the plan that unlocks approval workflows, SSO and audit logs named.
10 — Complete cost computability: annual cost derivable for a given team, locale count and traffic, every add-on and overage priced publicly, contract term and renewal conditions stated, and the cost of exporting or leaving the platform zero or published.
The Head of Content
For the self-service plans the numbers are unusually complete: additional users at 15,00 €/month each, extra traffic at 75,00 €/month for each 250GB, API requests at 10,00 €/month per 1M, additional locales at 20,00 €/month each and AI credits at 20,00 €/month per 200k, with the plans that unlock custom workflows, SSO and SCIM named. Two gaps keep the annual cost from being fully computable: the Enterprise tiers are described as fully customized consumption rather than priced, and the captured pricing pages give no headline monthly price for each plan. 2 8 13 2
The SME Marketer
As a buyer I can price my scenario from public pages: a second locale is 20,00 €/month per additional locale on the growth plan, an extra seat 15,00 €/month, additional traffic 75,00 €/month for each 250GB extra, extra API requests 10,00 €/month per 1M, and AI credits 20,00 €/month per 200k, with premium and enterprise tiers named for custom workflows, SSO and release management. We found no public information on guest or agency contributor pricing, contract and renewal conditions, or the cost of exporting content and leaving. 2 5 2
The Localisation Lead
The public pages state seats with 15,00 €/month per additional seat, 20,00 €/month per additional locale, 75,00 €/month for each 250GB extra of traffic, 10,00 €/month per 1M API requests, and AI credits both included and priced at 20,00 €/month per 200k — the locale dimension my teams need is explicitly priced. The Enterprise tier that carries custom workflows, SSO and SCIM is fully customised consumption, and the captured pages show limits and add-on rates without base plan prices or a content-record limit, so an annual total is not computable from what was captured. 5 8 2
The Web Engineer
Starter, Growth and Growth Plus publish spaces, seats, traffic, API requests, locales and AI credits with exact overage rates — 15,00 €/month each additional user, 75,00 €/month for each 250GB extra, 10,00 €/month per 1M API requests, 20,00 €/month per additional locale and 20,00 €/month per 200k AI credits — plus per-plan uptime SLAs and workflow execution limits. The tier that unlocks custom roles and workflows, SSO and SCIM is sold as fully customized consumption, and we found no public information on content-record limits or enterprise prices. 2 2
The Data Protection Officer
Self-service plans publish seat, traffic, API request, locale and AI-credit limits with exact overage rates — 15,00 € per month per additional user, 75,00 € per month for each 250GB extra traffic, 10,00 € per month per 1M API requests, 20,00 € per month per additional locale and 20,00 € per month per 200k AI credits — and Enterprise Premium and Elite are named as where SSO, SCIM and custom roles and workflows sit; we found no public information on the base subscription price of each self-service plan, the cost of additional spaces, or Enterprise pricing beyond fully customized consumption. 2 2 8
The Skeptic
This is the rare pricing page that answers my invoice question: '15,00 €/month each additional user', '20,00 €/month per additional locale', '10,00 €/month per 1M API requests', '75,00 €/month for each 250GB extra' and '20,00 €/month per 200k AI credits', with plan limits for traffic, requests and credits, and custom workflows, SSO and SCIM placed in the premium and enterprise tiers. The captured pages give per-unit prices and limits, but we found no public information on the plans' base prices, on content-record limits, or on the cost of exporting content on exit, and the enterprise tier is fully customized consumption. 2 5 8
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Storyblok
Is Storyblok European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Storyblok as EU-Made.
Where does Storyblok store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Storyblok have a free plan?
Yes. Storyblok has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Storyblok?
As of 15 Oct 2026, the panel rates CoreMedia (3/5), Contently (2.5/5) and Kontent.ai (2.5/5) highest among the other 14 Content Marketing 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 CoreMedia (EU origin, foreign-owned). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Storyblok alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 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. 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.
- 16 subprocessors 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
- 11 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 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
- 4 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 compliance fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 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.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Planning, editorial calendar & briefs — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Creation, review & approval — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Creation, review & approval — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Structured content, localisation & export — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Structured content, localisation & export — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Publishing, distribution & integrations — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Publishing, distribution & integrations — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 AI assistance & content rights — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 AI assistance & content rights — found from sitemap www.storyblok.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →