CRM
SuiteCRM
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by SalesAgility Ltd · suitecrm.com
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.
No written verdict for this product
The panel scored SuiteCRM, but the summary our synthesizer wrote did not survive our own contradiction check — twice. Rather than print a paragraph we cannot stand behind, we print none. Every score, rationale and source below is unaffected; read them and draw the conclusion yourself.
The scores
Contact & data model
panel disagrees
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 captured accounts screenshot carries no data-model detail, and the only record-level evidence anywhere is Outlook contact synchronisation — we found no public information on custom fields, deduplication, or how people, companies and deals relate to each other. I can't tell from these pages what I'd actually be setting up on day one. 2 7
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages show an accounts object, a unified record view and a calculated-fields capability that sets values from multiple other fields, but I found no public information on field types, required fields, deduplication or field-level permissions. The accounts screenshot page carries no data-model detail in its captured text, so the depth and hygiene of the core record — which for a CRM is a database of other people's personal data — rests on very thin evidence. 2 4 5
The Sales Ops Lead
The only data-model evidence I can act on is an accounts screenshot whose own capture notes no product or data-model detail, plus a promise that existing data and customisations survive a SugarCRM move and that fields can calculate values. I found no public information on field types with validation, required fields, or dedupe and merge tooling — the record hygiene a 40-seat forecast depends on is undocumented. 2 9 5
The RevOps Integrator
The captured screenshots of the accounts pages carry no product or data-model details, and beyond the accounts page we found no public information on custom fields, dedupe or merge tooling, or relationships between people, companies and deals. For a system I want to wire into a revenue stack, the record layer is close to a blank page here. 2 3
The Migrator
The only data-model evidence is an accounts-page screenshot whose captured text carries no detail, alongside calculated fields and a unified record view. We found no public information on field types, deduplication, required fields, or how contacts, companies and deals relate, so migration hygiene would rest entirely on my own tooling. 2 4 5
The Skeptic
The only record-level evidence is an accounts screenshot whose captured text carries no product detail, plus calculated-field arithmetic from a release note; we found no public information on field types, validation, deduplication, merging or anything beyond the standard objects. By what the pages actually show, this is a flat book with a calculator bolted on. 2 5
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
What the captured pages show is a Kanban view plus charting inside list views; we found no public information on stage requirements, win/loss capture, or any forecast view. It's a board I can drag cards across, not a process that produces reporting I'd hand to finance. 4
The Data Protection Officer
What the pages evidence is visualisation: a Kanban view and charting in list views. I found no public information on stage requirements, win/loss capture, forecast views, quota tracking or any reporting roll-up, so this sits just above a board of deals with amounts. 4
The Sales Ops Lead
The captured pipeline evidence stops at a Kanban view and list-view charting in the SuiteCRM 8 announcements. I found no public information on stage requirements, win/loss capture, quota tracking or any forecast view — nothing here produces reporting a finance department would accept. 4
The RevOps Integrator
A Kanban view and charting in list views are the only pipeline mechanics evidenced, and we found no public information on stage enforcement, required fields, win/loss capture or any forecast view. Nothing here rolls up into reporting I could hand a finance department. 4
The Migrator
The pipeline evidence amounts to a kanban view and charting in list views — visualisation, not enforcement. We found no public information on stage requirements, win/loss capture, quotas or any forecast view a finance department would accept. 4
The Skeptic
A kanban view and list-view charting are promised in the SuiteCRM 8 announcement, but we found no public information on stage requirements, win/loss capture, forecast views, quota tracking or a custom report builder. Charts bolted onto a kanban is visualisation, not a process finance would sign. 4
Automation & workflows
panel disagrees
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
Workflow Calculated Fields are documented — calculate values, add up values, set text from other fields — which goes past email templates, but we found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching or caps. I build my own automation between customer calls, and this is a hint, not a manual. 5
The Data Protection Officer
Workflow Calculated Fields let records compute and set values from other fields — genuine record-level automation, but single-step in what is evidenced. I found no public information on multi-step sequences, delays, branching, routing or webhooks, and the workflows page captures nothing beyond the entity footer. 5 6
The Sales Ops Lead
Workflow Calculated Fields — calculate values, add them up, set text from other fields — is the only automation shown, on a workflows page that adds no capability detail. I found no public information on multi-step sequences with delays, branching, or lead routing. 5 6
The RevOps Integrator
Workflow Calculated Fields — calculating, summing and setting values from other fields — is the one automation capability confirmed, which sits at simple record-level rules. We found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching, delays or lead routing. 5 6
The Migrator
Workflow Calculated Fields can compute and aggregate field values inside workflows, which is genuine but narrow record-level automation. The captured workflows page publishes no capability detail, and we found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching, delays or routing. 5 6
The Skeptic
The automation story rests on one feature — Workflow Calculated Fields that sum values or set a text value from other fields — while the dedicated workflows page capture contains nothing but a copyright line. We found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching, delays or lead routing. 5 6
Integrations & API
panel disagrees
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
There is a genuinely open REST API for tying into core business systems plus a described plugin range, and Outlook email, calendar and contact synchronisation are all named — but as a phased rollout with an end-of-2019 target, so the two-way calendar sync lives on a roadmap rather than on a shipped feature in the captures. Good bones, unproven arrival. 1 7
The Data Protection Officer
The Outlook add-in is evidenced across email history synchronisation, bi-directional calendar sync and manual/automatic contact sync, backed by an open REST API described as enabling integration with core business systems plus an extensive plugin range. That is two-way sync for a major provider with a documented API; I found no public information on webhooks, OAuth applications or API limits. 1 7 8
The Sales Ops Lead
There is an open REST API, a claimed extensive plugin range, and an Outlook add-in covering email history sync, bi-directional calendar sync and automatic contact sync. Only Outlook is evidenced among major providers, and I found no public information on webhooks, OAuth apps or documented API limits. 1 7
The RevOps Integrator
An open REST API is confirmed, and bi-directional Outlook calendar sync plus email and contact synchronisation appear on the roadmap — but the captured pages frame the Outlook work as a phased roll-out rather than a shipped capability, and the extensive range of plugins is named without a directory. We found no public information on webhooks, Google or Gmail connectivity, or API limits. 1 7
The Migrator
An open, documented REST API with a claimed extensive plugin range is the strongest part of this picture, and the Outlook add-in promises two-way calendar and contact sync — though as a phased roadmap with the previous version retired. We found no public information on API limits, webhooks, or sync for providers beyond Outlook. 1 7
The Skeptic
A genuinely open REST API and a claimed 'extensive range of plugins' earn mid marks, but the Outlook integration's bi-directional calendar and contact sync exists in the evidence only as a three-phase roadmap aimed at the end of Q4 2019, with the older add-on retired and no capture confirming the new one shipped. We found no public information on webhooks, OAuth apps or API limits. 1 7 8
European sovereignty
panel opinion
panel disagrees
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
Software I can download free of charge and host myself is real control over the data, and the vendor sells exactly that story. But we found no public information on hosting location, a DPA, or a subprocessor list for the hosted services, so I cannot verify where personal data lands unless I run the whole thing myself. 5 10
The Data Protection Officer
The vendor is European (SuiteCRM Ltd, SalesAgility in Stirling, UK) and the free open-source download lets a controller self-host, taking the vendor out of the processing chain for what the pages call ultimate control over your data. But for the vendor's own SuiteCRM Hosted and SuiteASSURED services I found no public information on data residency, a DPA or a subprocessor list — the hosted path is undocumented where it matters most, so this lands between the anchors rather than at either. 5 9 10
The Sales Ops Lead
The vendor is a UK company and the free open-source download promising ultimate control over your data offers a self-host path a DPO could work with. But for the hosted offerings I found no public information on data residency, a published DPA or any subprocessor list. 4 5 10
The RevOps Integrator
The product is open source with a free download, so a buyer can in principle host it wherever they choose, and the vendor is a UK company — but we found no public information on a DPA, a subprocessor list, or where SuiteCRM Hosted and SuiteASSURED actually process data. Self-host control is real leverage; the hosted side of the house is undocumented where it matters most. 4 5 10
The Migrator
We found no public information on entity jurisdiction, hosting location, subprocessors or a data processing agreement — the captured pages name SuiteCRM Ltd and stop there. Self-hosting via the free open-source download is possible, but the hosted and migration services never state where data lives or under whose law. 5 6 10
The Skeptic
Every sovereignty attribute comes back unknown: the vendor sells hosted services under a UK entity, and we found no public information on data residency, a DPA or any subprocessor list. Self-hosting the open-source code is the one escape hatch — and the hosted offering is sold precisely to the buyers who won't use it, with no stated guarantees. 6 9 10
Import, export & exit
panel disagrees
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 download is free, migrations from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM are offered with precision mapping, and the vendor states customers own the platform and the data after migration with no vendor lock-ins. Leaving software I can host myself is cheap by construction, though we found no public information on a self-serve full-fidelity export tool. 5 9
The Data Protection Officer
Entry is well evidenced: guided migration from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM with precision data mapping and a stated commitment that once migration is complete you own the platform and the data, with the open REST API and downloadable code placing the database in the customer's hands. I found no public information on self-serve, full-object export of history and attachments or tooling for the outbound journey — exit is implied by ownership, not documented as a feature. 1 5 9
The Sales Ops Lead
Migrations in from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM are vendor-run with a free health check, and the pages promise you own the platform and the data with no vendor lock-ins. Exit tooling is the missing half: I found no public information on self-serve full export of objects, activity history and files. 9 1 5
The RevOps Integrator
Guided migration from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM is confirmed, the vendor states that after migration you own the platform and the data with no vendor lock-ins, and the open API plus the free open-source download make rebuilding elsewhere feasible with effort. We found no public information on self-serve full-fidelity export tooling or dry-run import. 1 5 9
The Migrator
Migration in is a vendor-led engagement — Discovery Call, free Health Check, managed extraction from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM — with "you own the platform and the data—no vendor lock-ins" as the stated end state, and the free open-source download makes exit architecturally real. But we found no public information on self-serve export of all objects with notes and activity history, nor on dedupe or dry-run at import. Leaving cleanly would still mean the API and my own scripts. 1 5 9 10
The Skeptic
Migrations from HubSpot, Salesforce, Dynamics and SugarCRM are real offerings, the code is a free download under an open-source licence, and the vendor itself promises 'no vendor lock-ins and no rising access fees' — structurally strong exit. But the shown path in is a sales conversation (Discovery Call, health check), and we found no public information on self-serve full-object export, dry-run import or export formats. 1 5 9
Pricing transparency
panel disagrees
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 one number on these pages is zero — a free download under the open-source license — while we found no public information on what SuiteASSURED, SuiteCRM Hosted, Hosted Migration or Implementation cost, and the migration path opens with a Discovery Call. At one to five seats I still cannot compute an invoice without getting on a sales call. 5 9 10
The Data Protection Officer
The only figure the captured pages carry is the download, available free of charge under the open-source licence. The commercial services a buyer would actually need — SuiteCRM Hosted, SuiteASSURED, Hosted Migration, Implementation — carry no published prices, and I found no public information on their per-seat, per-month or VAT treatment, so the real invoice is a sales conversation. 5 9 10
The Sales Ops Lead
The only public price is the free-of-charge download under the open-source license; SuiteASSURED, SuiteCRM Hosted, hosted migration and implementation carry no prices on the captured pages. A hosted buyer cannot compute a per-seat invoice from public information. 5 10 9
The RevOps Integrator
The self-hosted download is free of charge under the open-source license, which is a genuine public entry price — but every paid item (SuiteCRM Hosted, SuiteASSURED, Hosted Migration, Implementation) appears without a number, so the real invoice for a hosted buyer is a sales conversation. 5 10
The Migrator
The one public number is unambiguous: the software downloads free of charge under its open-source licence. Everything a buyer actually pays for — SuiteASSURED, hosted, migration, implementation — carries no price and sits behind a "Schedule your Migration Discovery Call" prompt, so the real invoice cannot be computed from public pages. 5 9 10
The Skeptic
The download is publicly priced at zero, and then everything a hosted buyer actually needs — SuiteASSURED, SuiteCRM Hosted, Hosted Migration, Implementation — routes through a Discovery Call with no number captured. One computable tier and an entirely unquoted commercial stack means the real invoice is unknowable from public pages. 5 9 10
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 | — | 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 |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 15 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- 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 found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (suitecrm.com, suitecrm.com/suitecrm-7-10-released/suitecrm-7-10-screenshot-accounts, suitecrm.com/suitecrm-7-10-released/suitecrm-7-10-screenshot-account-view, suitecrm.com/salesagilitys-disruption-of-the-crm-market-continues-with-announcement-of-new-suitecrm-8-functionality, suitecrm.com/suitecrms-latest-release-7-8-now-includes-workflow-calculated-fields, suitecrm.com/solutions/role/workflows and 4 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- The panel’s written verdict is withheld: our own re-read found claims in it that the evidence does not carry, and a second synthesis did not fix them. The scores and the material below are unaffected. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage suitecrm.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Contact & data model — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Contact & data model — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Integrations & API — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Integrations & API — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Import, export & exit — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Import, export & exit — found from sitemap suitecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →