CRM
Eudonet CRM
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Eudonet · www.eudonet.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.
Eudonet CRM at a glance
- Vendor
- Eudonet
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 27 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 27 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 27 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Eudonet CRM 1/5, the mean of 6 judges. Eudonet is a SaaS platform for public-interest organizations — public sector, associations, foundations, higher education and alumni networks — and the weighted totals span 2.2 to 2.6 with no disagreement flagged. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 27 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 27 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Eudonet is a SaaS platform for public-interest organizations — public sector, associations, foundations, higher education and alumni networks — and the weighted totals span 2.2 to 2.6 with no disagreement flagged. Its strength is integrations, which scores 4: two-way, real-time Outlook appointment synchronisation across desktop and web, native Microsoft 365 sync with custom mapping, and a five-category integrations directory. Sovereignty also scores 4, on a French legal identity — Eudonet SAS under French law, with the site hosted by Scaleway in Paris — though judges found no public information on where the CRM's own customer data is processed, on a data processing agreement, or on a subprocessor list. Weaknesses concentrate in sales pipeline, at 0 to 1, and data portability, at 1 to 2: no captured page describes deal pipelines, stages or forecasting, the marketed solutions run to community and events, billing and online donations, and the only portability statement is a GDPR rights line. Contact management spans 1 to 3 on how much the centralization pitch and per-contact meeting tracking reveal. Pricing transparency scores 0 but is not counted in the weighted verdicts.
Speaks for it
- Two-way, real-time appointment synchronisation with Outlook desktop and Outlook Web that runs without manual intervention once configured
- Native synchronisation with the Microsoft 365 ecosystem, with custom mapping of where appointment data is stored and mobile access via the native Outlook app
- Integrations directory spanning five categories — accounting, communication and marketing, document management, payment method, and productivity and professional tools
- CRM enrichment adds business-specific data to appointments and automatically tracks meetings attended per contact
- French legal identity — Eudonet SAS under French law (RCS Nanterre n° 531 852 580), with the site hosted by Scaleway SAS in Paris and GDPR rights named including erasure and portability
Held against it
- The judges found no public information on deal pipelines, stages, quotas or forecasting — the marketed solutions run to community and events, billing, recurring payments and online donations rather than a sales process
- The Outlook synchronisation requires initial configuration by the vendor's technical teams and is offered with customisation tailored to organisational needs, with no published price
- The only portability statement on the captured pages is the legal notice's GDPR right to portability and consent withdrawal — the judges found no public information on import tooling, export formats or migration support
- The judges found no public information on a documented API, webhooks or email synchronisation, and the integrations directory names categories only, with Outlook the only named connection
- The judges found no public information on where the CRM's own customer data is processed, on a published data processing agreement, or on a subprocessor list
Best for
- You run a public-interest organization — public sector, professional association or federation, charity, higher education or research, alumni network or cultural institution — and need centralized data alongside community, events, billing and donation management
- Your team works in Outlook and Microsoft 365 and wants two-way, real-time calendar synchronisation with custom mapping into the CRM
- You communicate with member audiences by multichannel email and SMS and want marketing journey automation and automated event communications
- A French legal counterpart matters to your procurement — Eudonet is a French SAS under French law with the site hosted in Paris
Avoid if
- You live in a sales pipeline — you need deal stages, win/loss capture and forecast reporting, and the captured pages market community, events, billing and donations rather than any sales process
- You expect self-serve setup — the Outlook synchronisation requires initial configuration by the vendor's technical teams, with custom mapping decided together with the vendor
- You need a documented exit path without an IT project — the only portability statement is the legal notice's GDPR rights line, and even the Outlook link needs vendor technical teams to configure
- You need to connect a revenue stack via API — Outlook is the only named connection, the directory lists categories without named products, and the integration itself carries custom terms
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Contact & data model | 1 of 5 |
| Pipeline & forecasting | 0.5 of 5 |
| Automation & workflows | 1.5 of 5 |
| Integrations & API | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
| Import, export & exit | 0.5 of 5 |
Contact & data model
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Depth and hygiene of the core records — contacts, companies, deals, custom fields, deduplication.
0 — A flat address book; no relations between people, companies and deals.
3 — The standard three objects exist but customization is cosmetic: few field types, no required fields, duplicates accumulate unchecked.
5 — Custom fields across objects, basic dedupe on create, activity history on the record; complex models still need workarounds.
8 — Rich field types with validation, merge and dedupe tooling, relationships beyond the standard model, permissioned field access.
10 — A genuinely modelable system: custom objects or equivalent, bulk hygiene tooling, field-level history — the data model bends to the business, not the reverse.
The Solo Seller
The published pages name a CRM solution with data centralization and per-contact meeting tracking, and that is the whole story on records — I found no public information on custom fields, companies, deals or deduplication. I cannot even see whether people and organizations relate to each other, and merge or dedupe tooling goes entirely undocumented. 1 4
The Data Protection Officer
The vendor page promises centralised data on a single platform and the Outlook page shows per-contact tracking of meetings attended with configurable mapping of where appointment data is stored. We found no public information on the contact, company or deal model, field types, required fields or duplicate handling, and for a database of other people's personal data that silence is itself a finding. 1 4
The Sales Ops Lead
The pages show a CRM that centralizes data and, through the Outlook sync, automatically tracks which meetings each contact has attended — but beyond that I found no public information on company and deal objects, custom field types, required fields or deduplication and merge tooling. I cannot run record hygiene at 40 seats on what is public. 1 4
The RevOps Integrator
We found no public information on the core record model — no evidence of contact, company or deal objects, custom field types, required fields, or deduplication tooling anywhere in the captured pages. The only data-model-adjacent signals are a 'centralize your data' marketing module and appointment-level enrichment that tracks meetings attended per contact, which is thin next to what a CRM buyer needs to evaluate. 1 4
The Migrator
The pages give me a centralization pitch and one concrete detail — business-specific data attached to appointments and per-contact meeting history — and nothing more. I found no public information on custom fields, dedupe or merge tooling, or contact–company–deal relations, which is exactly what I need to judge whether a move-in can be kept clean. 1 4
The Skeptic
The captured pages name a CRM module, data centralization, and appointment-level enrichment that tracks which meetings each contact attended — and that is the entire record model on display. I found no public information on field types, deduplication, merge tooling, custom objects, or how contacts, organizations and transactions relate. 1 4
Pipeline & forecasting
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the pipeline enforces a process and produces reporting a finance department accepts.
0 — A kanban of deals with amounts; nothing is enforced, nothing rolls up.
3 — Multiple pipelines and stage probabilities exist, but no required fields per stage and only canned reports.
5 — Stage requirements, win/loss capture and standard forecast views; custom reporting is limited or an add-on.
8 — Enforceable process (required fields, stage gates, routing), custom report builder, forecast by team and period with quota tracking.
10 — Forecasting a CFO signs: weighted and commit-based views, historical snapshots, attainment tracking, and reporting composable enough to answer questions the vendor never anticipated.
The Solo Seller
The vendor's own module list covers marketing, events, community and billing, and I found no public information on deal pipelines, stages or forecasting on any captured page. Someone who lives in pipeline view between calls has literally nothing to evaluate here; this reads as a membership platform rather than a sales process. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The confirmed modules are full billing, recurring payment management, online donation collection and financial dashboards — revenue administration for public-interest organisations, not a sales process. We found no public information on deal stages, stage requirements, win/loss capture or forecasting of any kind. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
I found no public information on pipelines, stage requirements, win/loss capture, quota tracking or forecast views; the only reporting evidenced anywhere is financial dashboards inside the billing module. As the person who owns the forecast, nothing here would survive a CFO review. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
Nothing on the captured pages describes deal pipelines, stages, forecasts or quota tracking; the solutions list runs to events, donations, billing and community management rather than sales process. We found no public information on any pipeline or forecasting capability, so I score at the floor on absence of evidence. 1 2
The Migrator
No captured page describes deal pipelines, stage requirements or forecast reporting; the marketed modules are memberships, events, billing and donations. I found no public information on any sales process model, so I am scoring at the floor of what is evidenced. 1 2
The Skeptic
Nothing captured shows a pipeline at all: the closest items are 'financial tracking and dashboards' inside the billing module and real-time campaign analysis, from a vendor pitching public bodies, federations and alumni networks rather than sales teams. I found no public information on stages, required fields, forecasts, quota or win/loss reporting. 1
Automation & workflows
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Triggers, sequences and routing that remove manual work without a consultant.
0 — No automation beyond email templates.
3 — Simple if-this-then-that on records; no multi-step sequences, no branching.
5 — Multi-step workflows with delays and branching, email sequences, basic lead routing — capped by tier or count.
8 — Full workflow builder across objects with webhooks as steps, round-robin routing, sequence analytics.
10 — Automation as infrastructure: versioned workflows, error handling, per-step logs, and limits generous enough that the feature is not its own upsell.
The Solo Seller
Marketing journey automation, automated event communications and recurring process automation are all claimed, which sits at broadcast level rather than a workflow builder I could run myself — and I found no public information on triggers, branching or limits. The one automation shown in detail, the Outlook sync, "requires initial configuration by our technical teams", the opposite of set up in an afternoon. 1 4
The Data Protection Officer
Marketing journey automation, automated event communications, automation of recurring processes, and a calendar synchronisation that runs in real time without manual intervention once configured are all stated on the captured pages. We found no public information on a general workflow builder, branching, lead routing or sequence analytics, so this reads as packaged campaign automation rather than a workflow engine. 1 4
The Sales Ops Lead
The vendor markets automation of recurring processes, marketing journeys and event communications, and the Outlook sync genuinely runs in real time without manual intervention once set up. But I found no public information on a workflow builder, branching, lead routing or sequence analytics, and even the appointment sync requires initial configuration by the vendor's technical teams — automation the vendor operates, not one my team can build. 1 4
The RevOps Integrator
Marketing copy promises automation of recurring processes, marketing journeys and event communications, and the Outlook sync runs in real time without manual intervention once configured. But we found no public information on a workflow builder, triggers, branching, delays, lead routing or webhooks as steps — automation appears as claimed modules, not as an evidenced builder. 1 4
The Migrator
The pages claim automation of recurring processes, marketing journeys and event communications, with synchronisation running in real time once configured. I found no public information on a workflow builder, branching, sequence analytics or any usage limits, so this stays at the simple end of the scale. 1 4
The Skeptic
The homepage promises automation of recurring processes, marketing journey automation and automated event communications — capability names with nothing behind them on any captured page. I found no public information on a workflow builder, branching, delays, triggers, or any usage limits, which leaves this at simple automation claims. 1
Integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Two-way email/calendar sync, native connections, and an API that treats external systems as first-class.
0 — No API, no sync; data enters by CSV and leaves never.
3 — One-way email logging (BCC), a handful of Zapier triggers, a read-mostly API.
5 — Two-way email and calendar sync for the major providers, a documented REST API with sane limits, a modest native directory.
8 — Deep native integrations for the revenue stack, webhooks, OAuth apps, API parity with the UI for core objects.
10 — An ecosystem: public API covering everything the UI does, event streams, a marketplace, and sync so reliable the CRM can be the system of record without being the only system.
The Solo Seller
Two-way appointment synchronisation with Outlook and Microsoft 365 runs in real time and the integrations page lists five categories from accounting to payments, but Outlook is the only named connection, it is custom-priced, and I found no public information on email sync or a documented API. "Custom mapping: together, we decide" tells me every connection is a project rather than a toggle. 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
Two-way, real-time appointment synchronisation is confirmed for Outlook desktop, Outlook Web and the Microsoft 365 ecosystem, with mobile access via the native Outlook app, alongside a categorised directory covering accounting, payments, communication, document management and productivity. The Outlook connection requires initial configuration by the vendor's technical teams and is offered as a customisation tailored to organisational needs, and we found no public information on API documentation, webhooks, or two-way email synchronisation. 3 4
The Sales Ops Lead
Two-way, real-time appointment synchronisation with Outlook desktop and web, plus native Microsoft 365 sync with custom mapping, is properly documented. Beyond Microsoft the directory is categories only — accounting, payments, communication, documents, productivity — with no named products, and I found no public information on a documented API, its rate limits or authentication. 3 4
The RevOps Integrator
The Outlook calendar sync is the real thing — two-way, real-time, with custom field mapping agreed per client — and the integrations page names five categories including accounting and payments. But Outlook is the only named connection, initial configuration requires the vendor's technical teams, the integration carries custom unpriced terms, and we found no public information on a documented API, webhooks, OAuth apps or two-way email sync, which sits this below the anchor it needs to hit for a revenue stack. 3 4
The Migrator
Two-way, real-time Outlook calendar synchronisation across desktop and web, plus a native directory spanning five categories, is real evidence. I found no public information on a documented API, webhooks, or email and Google sync, and the Outlook connection itself requires initial configuration by the vendor's technical teams. 3 4
The Skeptic
A two-way, real-time appointment sync with the Microsoft 365 ecosystem plus custom field mapping is genuinely evidenced, and an integration directory grouped by category exists — but the Outlook connector requires initial configuration by Eudonet's technical teams and is offered 'with customisation tailored to your organisational needs', a consultant handshake rather than a self-serve connection. I found no public information on API documentation, webhooks, email sync, or a single named third-party product in the directory. 3 4
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where other people's personal data actually lives and under whose law — entity, hosting, subprocessors, DPA.
0 — US entity, US-default hosting, no public DPA or subprocessor list.
3 — A DPA exists and an EU region is available on request or on top tiers; subprocessor exposure to US CLOUD Act reach is broad and undocumented.
5 — EU hosting selectable at signup, published DPA and subprocessor list; core processing still touches US entities.
8 — EU entity or EU-default hosting with published subprocessors, consent-friendly fields, retention and deletion controls; residual US exposure named and narrow.
10 — European entity, EU-only processing including subprocessors, deletion that provably deletes — sovereignty a DPO can sign off without a caveat file.
The Solo Seller
Eudonet SAS is a French company under French law, the captured legal notice names Scaleway in Paris as the site's host, and the GDPR rights list covers access, erasure, limitation, opposition, portability and consent withdrawal — a genuinely European posture. But that notice covers the website: I found no public information on where the CRM's own data is processed, on a published data processing agreement, or on subprocessors. Good bones, missing paperwork. 2
The Data Protection Officer
Eudonet is a French société par actions simplifiée under French law with exclusive competence in Paris, and the only hosting fact captured places its website with Scaleway at a Paris address — structurally the right jurisdiction for personal data, and the legal notice names RGPD, Informatique et Libertés and Loi 25 rights including erasure, portability and consent withdrawal. But we found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, consent-friendly fields, product-level retention and deletion controls, or where the CRM's customer data itself is processed — the site host is not proof of data residency — so the visible posture is an entity I can trust and documentation I cannot sign. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
The legal notice establishes Eudonet SAS, a French company under French law with the website hosted by Scaleway in Paris, and states GDPR rights including erasure and portability. But I found no public information on where the CRM's customer data is hosted, on subprocessors, or on a published data processing agreement, so a DPO sign-off is not possible from these pages. 2
The RevOps Integrator
Eudonet SAS is a French company under French law with a published RCS and VAT registration, the site is hosted by Scaleway in Paris, and the legal notice cites GDPR with access, rectification, erasure and portability rights. What holds this back: we found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, or where the CRM's production data — as opposed to the website — is actually hosted. 2
The Migrator
The legal notice puts the entity squarely in France — a French SAS under French law, with the website hosted by Scaleway in Paris — and names GDPR rights including erasure and portability. I found no public information on where the product's customer data is hosted, nor a published DPA or subprocessor list, which is the first thing a DPO would ask me for. 2
The Skeptic
The legal notice names a French SAS under French law with Scaleway SAS in Paris as hoster — real European signal, though the hosting statement covers the website, and I found no public information on where the CRM data itself resides, on a published data processing agreement, or on a subprocessor list. The GDPR rights sentence in a French legal notice is the legal minimum, not evidence about processing. 2
Import, export & exit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting in with history intact, and out with everything — the anti-lock-in criterion.
0 — Import is a support ticket; export is contacts-only CSV missing notes, activities and files.
3 — Self-serve CSV import with mapping; export covers main objects but drops activity history, attachments or relations.
5 — Guided migration from major competitors, full-object CSV export, API access sufficient to rebuild the database elsewhere with effort.
8 — Complete export (all objects, history, files) self-serve in open formats, import with dedupe and dry-run, no API metering that prices exit out of reach.
10 — Exit as a feature: documented full-fidelity export, migration tooling both directions, and contractual data-return terms — leaving is a weekend, which is exactly why you can stay.
The Solo Seller
The only portability signal anywhere is a legal-notice sentence about the right to portability and withdrawing consent — a GDPR mention, not a product feature. I found no public information on import tooling, export formats, or getting notes and history out intact, and undocumented exit is a real risk for an operator with no IT department. 2
The Data Protection Officer
The legal notice affirms the right to portability and withdrawal of consent for data collected via the website, which is a rights statement about the site, not an export capability for the product. We found no public information on import tooling, export formats or migration support for CRM records, activity history and attachments — the questions that decide whether an exit is possible at all. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
The only portability signals are the site's GDPR portability statement and a vendor-configured appointment sync with custom mapping; I found no public information on self-serve import, export scope or formats, or API access sufficient to rebuild the database elsewhere. Exit planning cannot start from what is public. 2 4
The RevOps Integrator
The only portability-adjacent statement is a GDPR rights line about data portability and consent withdrawal on the website's legal notice. We found no public information on export formats, migration tooling, or whether history and attachments leave with the records — and the vendor-configured integration model gives no self-serve signal either way. 2
The Migrator
The only portability statement anywhere is a legal right in the privacy notice — you may exercise your right to portability and withdraw consent at any time — which is a GDPR citation, not an export button. I found no public information on import tooling, export formats, migration help or API-based extraction, and with vendor technicians needed just to configure the Outlook link, an exit here looks like a project, not a weekend. 2 4
The Skeptic
The only portability statement captured is the legal notice telling you that you may exercise your GDPR portability right and withdraw consent at any time — a right, not a feature. I found no public information on import, export formats, migration tooling, or what actually leaves the system when a customer exits. 2
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real invoice — per seat, per month, at renewal — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — An entry price exists, but the tiers most buyers need are unpriced, or per-seat maths is obscured by bundles, minimums or mandatory onboarding fees.
5 — Most tiers carry real numbers with billing period and VAT treatment stated, but at least one commonly needed capability hides in an unpriced tier or usage-metered add-on.
8 — Every tier priced publicly including annual/monthly split; limits, seat minimums and overage rules stated; only genuine enterprise contracts are custom.
10 — Complete price computability: every tier, add-on, usage meter and renewal rule public, with a calculator or table that makes the invoice at 3 and 30 seats a two-minute exercise.
The Solo Seller
Not one tier carries a number on the captured pages, and the single pricing-related fact says the Outlook integration "is available with customisation tailored to your organisational needs" — a quote request, not a price. I cannot compute any invoice at one seat or five from public information, and vendor-configured setup suggests onboarding involvement I would be paying for blindly. 1 4
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public prices for any solution or tier anywhere in the captured pages. The only pricing-related statement concerns the Outlook integration, which is described as available with customisation tailored to organisational needs, and we found no published price for it — a buyer cannot compute any invoice from what is public. 4
The Sales Ops Lead
No tier price, seat price or billing period appears anywhere I reviewed; the one pricing statement captured says the Outlook integration is available with customisation and carries no published price. Every number on this product is a sales conversation, so a buyer cannot compute even a starting invoice. 1 4
The RevOps Integrator
The captured pages show no tier prices at all, and the single pricing fact states the Outlook integration is available with customisation tailored to organisational needs at no published price. From public pages alone, every tier appears to be a sales conversation, so a buyer cannot begin to compute an invoice. 1 4
The Migrator
No captured page carries a single number: no tiers, no per-seat prices, no billing terms. The Outlook integration is quoted as "available with customisation tailored to your organisational needs", confirming the custom-quote model — every tier is a sales conversation. 1 4
The Skeptic
Not one figure appears on any captured page: solutions are listed unpriced, and the single pricing-adjacent statement says the Outlook integration is available with customisation and carries no published price. A buyer cannot compute any invoice, at any seat count, without a sales conversation. 1 2 4
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 Eudonet CRM
Is Eudonet CRM European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Eudonet CRM is based.
Where does Eudonet CRM store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 27 Oct 2026.
Does Eudonet CRM have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 27 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Eudonet CRM?
As of 27 Oct 2026, the panel rates Bitrix24 (3/5), Pipeliner CRM (3/5) and HubSpot Sales Hub (3/5) highest among the other 52 CRM 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 OnePageCRM (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Eudonet CRM alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 27 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.
- 10 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 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
- 3 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
- 1 data 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 support 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
Sources (4)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.eudonet.com Checked 27 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.eudonet.com Checked 27 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.eudonet.com Checked 27 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.eudonet.com Checked 27 Oct 2026 Details →