CRM
Lime CRM
Provenance unknown Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Lime Technologies AB · www.lime.tech
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Lime CRM, from Lime Technologies Sweden AB (org. nr 556397-0465), is an industry-tailored CRM with background AI agents that sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads, plus AI agents handling customer service across chat, email and WhatsApp. Sovereignty is the standout, with scores sitting at 4 on a Swedish legal entity, "Made in Sweden, built for Europe" positioning, a trust center and development, governance and support kept in-house — though no public information was found on hosting locations, a DPA, subprocessors or retention controls, so it is a European starting point rather than a verified posture. Automation follows at 2-4, credited to the shipped agents, with no public information on a workflow builder a team could configure. The weakest marks are data portability at 1 — nothing public on import, export or API access — and sales pipeline and contact management at 1-2, resting on the agent claims alone. No prices are published, so every quote begins as a sales conversation. No significant disagreements were flagged; the widest spread is automation.
Speaks for it
- Sovereignty is the most consistent mark, scoring 4 on a Swedish legal entity (Lime Technologies Sweden AB, org. nr 556397-0465)
- Development, governance and support run in-house under the vendor's stated full ownership of the value chain
- Background AI agents that sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads are on record, with automation scoring 2-4
- AI agents automate customer service across chat, email and WhatsApp
- A trust center is available
Held against it
- Data portability scores sit at 1, with no public information on import, export, migration or API access
- Sales pipeline scores sit at 1-2, with AI ranking of opportunities the only capability on record
- Contact management scores sit at 1-2, with no public information on field types, deduplication or how people, companies and deals relate
- The integration claim on record is 'smart integrations and built-in AI' plus chat, email and WhatsApp channels, with no named connector shown
- No prices are published, so buying starts with a sales conversation
Best for
- You want a European vendor identity — a Swedish legal entity, 'Made in Sweden, built for Europe' positioning, and in-house development, governance and support
- Your customer service runs through chat, email and WhatsApp and you want AI agents working cases in the background
- You expect a partner-led rollout built on support and change-management services for CRM implementation
- You prefer automation delivered as ready-made AI agents rather than workflows you build yourself
Avoid if
- You need stage-based pipeline reporting a finance department accepts — sales pipeline scored 1-2, with AI agents ranking opportunities the only capability on record
- You need to move data in and out yourself — data portability scored 1, and onboarding is framed as the vendor's support and change-management services
- Your revenue stack depends on named connectors or a documented API — the public claim stops at 'smart integrations and built-in AI'
- You build your own multi-step workflows — the automation on record is vendor-shipped agents, with no public information on a configurable workflow builder
The scores
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
We found no public information on the record model — contacts, companies, custom fields, or duplicate handling — beyond a passing note that agents rank opportunities. Nothing captured lets me judge whether one afternoon of setup is even possible. 1
The Data Protection Officer
For a database of other people's personal data, the record model gets one sentence: an "industry-tailored CRM" plus AI agents that qualify leads. We found no public information on custom fields, required fields, deduplication, merge tooling or field-level permissions, so data hygiene is unverifiable from the captured page and I can credit little beyond the object basics implied by a mature CRM. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The only record-level signal is AI that "sorts cases, ranks opportunities and qualifies leads", which implies deal-like records and little else. We found no public information on custom fields, required fields, merge or deduplication tooling, or activity history, so a 40-seat rollout cannot be scoped from what is shown. 1
The RevOps Integrator
An 'industry-tailored CRM' whose agents 'sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads' implies records for opportunities and cases, but I found no public information on field types, validation, deduplication, or how people, companies and deals relate. The tailoring claim plus AI assistants earning nothing more. 1
The Migrator
I found no public information on the data model — custom fields, validation, deduplication, or how people, companies and deals relate — beyond the line that this is an industry-tailored CRM supporting the entire customer journey. Marketing copy is not a schema, and a migration plan needs a schema. 1
The Skeptic
A CRM is confirmed as the product — cases, opportunities, a customer journey — but the captured pages say nothing about field types, required fields, deduplication, or how people, companies and deals relate; we found no public information on the data model itself. 1
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 only pipeline-adjacent statement is that agents "sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads"; we found no public information on stages, required fields, win/loss capture, or forecasting. I run my pipeline between customer calls, and I cannot see any enforced process in what was captured. 1
The Data Protection Officer
The only pipeline evidence is agents that "rank opportunities and qualify leads" — scoring, not process. We found no public information on stages and their requirements, win/loss capture, forecast views or quota tracking, so nothing here reads as reporting a finance department would accept. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
This is the criterion my forecast lives on, and the pages give me almost nothing: no stages, no required fields, no win/loss capture, no forecast or quota views. The only pipeline evidence is AI ranking opportunities, and everything that would make reporting a CFO accepts is unevidenced. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Ranking opportunities is the only pipeline-adjacent capability on the page; I found no public information on stages, required fields per stage, win/loss capture, forecasts or quota tracking. Nothing published lets me confirm this rises above a deal list. 1
The Migrator
The nearest fact is that AI agents rank opportunities and qualify leads; I found no public information on pipelines, stage requirements, win/loss capture or forecasting views. Nothing here that a finance department could accept, so I plan for nothing enforced. 1
The Skeptic
Agents that rank opportunities suggest opportunities exist, but that is the whole of it; we found no public information on stages, required fields per stage, win/loss capture, forecasting, or any report a finance department would recognise. The page sells outcomes, and a pipeline needs process. 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
The vendor states automation is real: agents "work in the background, sorts cases, ranks opportunities and qualifies leads, without you lifting a finger" across chat, email and WhatsApp. But we found no public information on a workflow builder, sequences, branching, or routing I could configure myself — only agents the vendor ships. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Real signal at last: customer service runs AI agents across chat, email and WhatsApp, and background agents sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads "without you lifting a finger". We found no public information on a user-configurable workflow builder — triggers, branching, delays, sequence analytics — and I would want agents acting on personal data to have logged, explainable decisions, on which the captured pages are silent. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Background agents that sort cases and qualify leads, plus chat, email and WhatsApp case automation, are real automation claims. But we found no public information on a workflow builder, branching, delays, round-robin routing, webhooks or usage limits, so the depth stops well short of infrastructure. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Agents that work 'in the background, sorts cases, ranks opportunities and qualifies leads' plus AI agents handling chat, email and WhatsApp are automation with some substance — more than templates. But I found no public information on a multi-step workflow builder, branching, delays, routing or webhooks as steps, which caps it at simple background automation. 1
The Migrator
AI agents that sort cases, rank opportunities and run customer service across chat, email and WhatsApp are genuine automation claims, but I found no public information on a workflow builder, triggers, branching or sequences that my own team could construct. Automation I cannot build or inspect is a black box, not a process. 1
The Skeptic
Background AI agents that sort cases, rank opportunities and qualify leads, plus automation across chat, email and WhatsApp, are the only automation on record; we found no public information on a user-configurable workflow builder, branching, delays, or the tier caps that usually ride along with features like these. 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
The page states "smart integrations and built-in AI" and connects the service product to chat, email and WhatsApp channels. We found no public information naming a specific integration, or on two-way email and calendar sync, or on API access, so I cannot verify my Gmail and calendar would sync. 1
The Data Protection Officer
"Smart integrations" is the entire claim; the named connections are the chat, email and WhatsApp channels of the service product. We found no public information on an API, two-way sync with major email or calendar providers, webhooks or a native directory, so I credit the channels and nothing more. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The sum of public integration evidence is the phrase "smart integrations and built-in AI". We found no public information on named connectors, email or calendar sync, API documentation or webhooks — I need a directory and documented endpoints to run a revenue stack, and none is shown. 1
The RevOps Integrator
'Smart integrations and built-in AI' is the entire claim; I found no public information on a documented API, webhooks, a native directory, or two-way email and calendar sync. For a revenue stack this is unassessable from what is published, and I will not credit a two-word claim as an ecosystem. 1
The Migrator
The vendor page promises "smart integrations and built-in AI" plus channel automation, but I found no public information on two-way email and calendar sync, a documented API, webhooks or an integration directory. For an exit planner, an unevidenced API is an exit risk. 1
The Skeptic
The marketing promises smart integrations without naming one, and messaging channels in chat, email and WhatsApp are claimed; we found no public information on an API, two-way email or calendar sync, or a native directory. 'Smart integrations' is a brochure sentence until a connector gets a name. 1
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
The company is a Swedish legal entity — Lime Technologies Sweden AB, Org. nr 556397-0465 — marketed as "Made in Sweden, built for Europe", with a trust center available. But we found no public information on hosting location, a published DPA, subprocessors, or deletion controls, so where my customers' data actually lives cannot be verified from the captured pages. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Identity is the strong card: a Swedish legal entity, "Made in Sweden, built for Europe", and development, governance and support kept in-house — a genuinely European starting point with less obvious subprocessor sprawl. But the trust center's contents were not captured, and we found no public information on hosting region, DPA, subprocessor list, retention or deletion controls, so the posture a data protection officer must verify cannot be verified from public pages. European entity, undocumented processing hygiene — hence middling. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The entity is confirmed Swedish (Lime Technologies Sweden AB, org. nr 556397-0465) with "Made in Sweden, built for Europe" positioning and a trust center. But we found no public information on hosting location, DPA, subprocessor list, retention or deletion controls — the entity is European, the compliance surface is unevidenced. 1
The RevOps Integrator
A Swedish legal entity (org. nr. 556397-0465) marketing 'Made in Sweden, built for Europe' and claiming in-house development, governance and support is a genuine European signal that narrows subcontractor exposure. But I found no public information on hosting location, a published DPA, or a subprocessor list, so a DPO cannot yet sign this off. 1
The Migrator
The legal entity is Lime Technologies Sweden AB (org. nr 556397-0465), development and support run in-house, and the pitch is "Made in Sweden, built for Europe" — a European footing most rivals cannot claim. But I found no public information on hosting locations, a DPA, subprocessors or retention and deletion controls; a trust center is mentioned, yet its contents are not captured. 1
The Skeptic
A Swedish legal entity, an origin story of made in Sweden and built for Europe, a trust center, and a claim of in-house development are on record, which is more than most; but we found no public information on hosting locations, a published DPA, retention controls, or a subprocessor list, so where personal data actually sits remains an open question rather than a signed-off fact. 1
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
We found no public information on import, export, API access, or data-return terms. Onboarding is framed as the vendor's own "support and change management" services, which for a one-to-five seat buyer reads as a project rather than a self-serve move in and out. 1
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public information on export — formats, activity history, attachments, files — on import or migration tooling, or on contractual data-return terms; the only adjacent offer is implementation and change-management services, which is about arriving, not leaving. With no API documentation either, exit capability is entirely unverifiable from public pages. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Nothing on the captured pages speaks to import, export or exit: no CSV mapping, no export formats, no API access terms. The only migration-adjacent signal is "support and change management services for CRM implementation", which reads as services-led onboarding rather than self-serve portability. 1
The RevOps Integrator
The vendor sells 'support and change management services' around CRM implementation, and I found no public information on self-serve import, full-object export, or API access sufficient to rebuild the database elsewhere. Nothing published evidences exit as anything but a services project. 1
The Migrator
I found no public information on import with dedupe, full-object export including notes and activity history, API metering, or contractual data-return terms — my entire buying brief. When exit capability is unevidenced I plan for the worst, and the worst sits at the bottom of this scale. 1
The Skeptic
Nothing in the captured material touches import, export, migration or API access; we found no public information on getting data in with history intact or out with everything included, and silence on exit terms is the loudest lock-in signal a buyer can get. 1
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
The captured pages carry no price for any plan — no per-seat figures, no tiers, no billing period, no VAT treatment — and the go-to-market leans on implementation services. I pay with my own card, and I cannot compute even a first invoice from what is public. 1
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public information on pricing: the captured page shows no tiers, per-seat figures, billing-period split, VAT treatment or renewal terms. A buyer can compute nothing; "Over 1 million users" is the only number on offer and it is not a price. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The captured page shows no prices, tiers, seat counts or billing terms of any kind. A buyer cannot compute even a single-seat monthly invoice from public information — every commercial question is a sales conversation. 1
The RevOps Integrator
I found no public prices on the captured page for any tier, seat count, billing period or add-on. A buyer cannot compute even a starting invoice from what is published, so every quote begins as a sales conversation. 1
The Migrator
I found no public information on prices — no tiers, per-seat rates, billing periods or VAT treatment — while support and change-management services are sold alongside the software. From public pages alone the invoice cannot be computed, which is the lowest state of this criterion. 1
The Skeptic
No price, billing period, seat minimum, tier structure or AI-usage meter appears anywhere in the captured material, and the only visible engagement paths are an email address and implementation services; we found no public information on pricing at all, so no buyer could compute any invoice from this evidence. 1
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 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 | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU only ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 2 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 2 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. The policy expressly reserves occasional transfers to parties outside the EU/EEA under SCCs/adequacy, and the concrete hosting location (AWS, Europe/Ireland) is stated only for Lime Go Gmail add-in data.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. AWS is US-headquartered (Amazon) though the named servers are in Europe/Ireland, and the contracting AWS entity — possibly an EU subsidiary of the US parent — is not specified; other subprocessors are only described by category (data analysis, email transmission, database management, data hosting) without names.
- 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
- We found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (lime.tech, lime-technologies.com/en/legal/privacy-policy). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 4 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
- 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 (2)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.lime.tech Checked 29 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.lime-technologies.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →