CRM
TecArt CRM
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by TecArt GmbH · www.tecart.de
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
TecArt CRM is sold by TecArt GmbH (Fischmarkt 5, 99084 Erfurt), and the bench judged it from German-language captures — homepage, pricing page, privacy policy — that yielded little beyond a price table. Scoring is lopsided. Pricing transparency is the strongest criterion at 5-6: all three tiers (TecArt Basic, Pro, Enterprise) publish prices of 19/49/79 € per user/month, with monthly and annual options, net-plus-VAT treatment, and a 30-day trial that requires no payment method and auto-cancels; judges stopped short of top marks because annual rates, per-tier limits and seat minimums are unevidenced. Every functional criterion — contact management, sales pipeline, automation, integrations, data portability — scores 0-1, because the captured pages say nothing about the data model, pipelines, workflows, connectors or data export. Sovereignty ranges 1-2: the Erfurt entity address is the sole confirmed signal, while the evidence lists ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure as unknown. No disagreement rose above threshold; the spread on any criterion is at most one point.
Speaks for it
- All three tiers (TecArt Basic, Pro, Enterprise) carry public per-user prices of 19/49/79 € per user/month
- The 30-day trial requires no payment method, needs no installation and auto-cancels
- Both monthly and annual billing options are offered, with net-plus-VAT pricing stated
- The vendor is a German legal entity with a published address in Erfurt
Held against it
- No facts on contacts, companies, deals, custom fields or dedupe appear in any captured page
- Pipelines, stages, forecasts, automation triggers and workflows are entirely unevidenced
- No API, email or calendar sync, marketplace or connector directory is evidenced
- No import, export or migration path is evidenced anywhere in the evidence
- Ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure are all listed as unknown, and the captured privacy policy yielded no DPA
Best for
- You need to compute a monthly per-seat CRM invoice before talking to sales — public per-user prices at every tier, including Enterprise
- You want to evaluate risk-free before committing — the 30-day trial requires no payment method and auto-cancels
- You are sourcing from European vendors and treat a German GmbH with a published Erfurt address as a qualifying starting signal, not a completed compliance case
Avoid if
- You need documented pipelines, forecasting and workflow automation — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your stack depends on integrations such as an API, email/calendar sync or Zapier — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You must be able to export or migrate your data later — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You need documentation a DPO can sign — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
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
The evidence shows me not one contact, company, deal, field type or dedupe feature — the only confirmed facts are prices and a street address. 1
The Data Protection Officer
The evidence is silent on the entire data model — no contacts, companies, deals, field types, dedupe or permissioning appear anywhere in the captured facts. A CRM is a database of other people's personal data before it is anything else, and a data model that does not exist on paper scores at the floor. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
The capture contains nothing on the data model — no objects, no custom fields, no dedupe, no relations. Silence scores at the bottom anchor, and I'm not moving a 40-seat team onto an unverifiable address book. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
The evidence says nothing about the data model — no contacts, companies, deals, custom fields or dedupe capability is evidenced anywhere. I can't even confirm the standard three objects, so this sits at the floor. 1
The Migrator
Three captured pages and not one fact about contacts, companies, deals, custom fields or dedupe — the data model is entirely invisible. Unevidenced capability is absent capability, so I can't credit even relations between people and companies; floor. 1 2 3
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
No pipeline, stage, probability, forecast or report is evidenced anywhere in the captured pages. I can't buy a pipeline the vendor hasn't shown me. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Nothing in the registry mentions pipelines, stages, required fields, forecasts or reporting; even the homepage yielded no confirmed facts. With no evidenced process or roll-up, this anchors at 0. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
Not one fact on pipelines, stages, required fields, win/loss capture or forecast roll-ups; I can't even confirm the kanban-with-amounts baseline. Nothing here would survive a pipeline-hygiene audit, let alone produce reporting a CFO signs. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
Pipelines, stages, required fields, forecasts — all silent. I won't score a sales process the evidence never shows; nothing above anchor-3's multi-pipeline baseline is confirmable. 1
The Migrator
The registry is silent on pipelines, stages, required fields, win/loss capture and forecasting — not even the homepage makes a pipeline claim. I score the absence, not the benefit of the doubt; this looks like deals on a board with nothing enforced. 1 2 3
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
Not even an email template makes it into the evidence. Zero automation facts means zero score, full stop. 1
The Data Protection Officer
No trigger, workflow, sequence or routing capability is evidenced on any captured page. I cannot credit automation the vendor has not documented. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
No trigger, sequence, routing or workflow evidence anywhere in the registry. Per the anchors, automation that isn't documented doesn't exist, and I score what's documented: nothing. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
No trigger, workflow, sequence or routing is evidenced; even anchor-3 if-this-then-that can't be confirmed. As far as this sheet proves, reps do everything by hand. 1
The Migrator
No trigger, workflow, sequence or routing is evidenced anywhere in the evidence. A product that doesn't document automation doesn't get credit for it from me. 1 2 3
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
No API, no email or calendar sync, no Zapier, no native directory — the evidence shows no way for data to enter or leave this system. That's the 0 anchor by the letter. 1
The Data Protection Officer
No API, no email or calendar sync, no integration directory appears in the evidence; the only substantive capture is a price table. For a system holding contact data, fully unevidenced ingress and egress paths are themselves a compliance exposure, not just a feature gap. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
No API, no email or calendar sync, no native directory appears in any capture — the integration story is total silence. A CRM that feeds a forecast cannot be a silo, and this one is unevidenced end to end. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
My make-or-break criterion, and the evidence is silent: no API, no webhooks, no two-way email or calendar sync, no native connector directory — anchor-3 BCC logging plus a read-mostly API can't even be confirmed. A CRM I can't wire into the stack is a spreadsheet with ambitions. 1
The Migrator
No API, no email or calendar sync, no Zapier, no marketplace — silence across every captured page. By my rules that's the anchor where data enters by CSV and leaves never, and that's precisely the vendor I've had to pay consultants to escape. 1 2 3
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
TecArt GmbH at Fischmarkt 5, Erfurt is the one real European signal, but hosting location, DPA, subprocessors and ownership are all unknown on the captured pages — the privacy policy URL yielded zero facts. An Erfurt letterhead doesn't let me sign my customers' data over to undocumented infrastructure. 2 3
The Data Protection Officer
The single positive signal is the German entity address — TecArt GmbH, Fischmarkt 5, Erfurt — but every computed attribute is unknown: no hosting location, no subprocessor list, no retention or deletion controls, and no DPA content captured even though a privacy page exists in the registry. A German letterhead is not a compliance program; undocumented subprocessor exposure scores as exposure, so this sits just above the floor. 2 3
The Sales Ops Lead
The pricing page confirms a German entity address in Erfurt, which is a real signal, but the privacy-policy capture yields no DPA, no subprocessor list, no residency or deletion facts. That's a German letterhead with none of the paperwork a DPO would need to sign off. 2 3
The RevOps Integrator
A German GmbH at Fischmarkt 5, Erfurt is a genuine sovereignty signal — this is not a US entity. But the captured privacy policy yielded no DPA, no subprocessor list, no hosting location, so I can't reach anchor-3's 'a DPA exists,' let alone documented EU-only processing. 2 3
The Migrator
The legal entity is a German GmbH at an Erfurt address, which lifts it off the US-entity floor, but residency, DPA and subprocessors are all marked unknown — the privacy policy was captured and still yielded no DPA or subprocessor list. A German name is not a sovereignty case; a DPO cannot sign off on 'unknown'. 2 3
The Skeptic
An Erfurt address on a pricing page is not sovereignty: the evidence itself computes jurisdiction, residency and subprocessor exposure as unknown, and even the captured privacy policy yielded zero confirmed facts — no DPA, no subprocessor list. The German entity address is the only crumb, worth a single point above the computed zero. 2 3
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
No import, export, migration or data-return capability is evidenced anywhere. Exit terms are absent, which for me means lock-in risk is unknowable — and unknowable is worst case. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Import, export, migration tooling and API access are entirely unevidenced; the closest data-lifecycle statement on the page is 'keine Installation' for the trial, which says nothing about exit. Lock-in that cannot be quantified scores 0. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
Silent on import, export, API access and migration tooling — per the anchors, exit capability that isn't evidenced doesn't exist. I won't load a database into a system I can't prove I can take back out. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
No import, export or migration path is evidenced anywhere — not even anchor-3 CSV mapping. If I can't prove data leaves, I treat it as locked in. 1
The Migrator
My make-or-break criterion, and the evidence has zero facts on import, export, migration tooling, dedupe-on-import or API access for extraction. Nothing self-serve, nothing in open formats, nothing contractual about data return — undocumented exit is no exit. 1 2 3
Pricing transparency
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
Basic/Pro/Enterprise at €19/€49/€79 per user per month are public, VAT treatment is stated, both billing periods exist, and even Enterprise carries a number instead of a sales call — plus a 30-day no-card trial with auto-cancel, which is exactly how I like to buy. It stops short of the top: the annual/monthly split figures aren't published and per-tier limits, seat minimums and overage rules are nowhere, so I still can't fully compute the renewal invoice. 2
The Data Protection Officer
All three tiers carry real public per-user numbers including Enterprise at 79 €, VAT treatment is explicit ('netto zuzüglich gesetzlicher Mehrwertsteuer'), both monthly and annual billing are offered, and the 30-day trial requires no payment method with auto-cancellation. What blocks full invoice computability: the annual rate itself is not captured, nor seat minimums, per-tier feature limits or renewal rules. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
All three tiers carry public per-user prices (19/49/79 €) with the billing unit and net-plus-VAT treatment stated, so the core of a 40-seat invoice is computable — even the top tier is priced, not a sales call. But the annual/monthly price split isn't published and no tier limits, seat minimums or overage rules are captured, which is what keeps it short of the 8 anchor. 2
The RevOps Integrator
All three tiers carry public per-user prices (19/49/79 €), monthly and annual options, explicit net-plus-VAT treatment, and a clean 30-day no-card auto-cancelling trial — that clears rubric level 5. But per-tier feature boundaries, annual rates and seat minimums are unevidenced, so I still can't compute the real invoice at 30 seats. 2
The Migrator
All three tiers carry public per-user prices (19/49/79 € user/month) with VAT treatment stated and a 30-day trial with no payment method — the monthly per-seat invoice is computable. But the annual rate behind the bare 'monatlich jährlich' toggle is never broken out, and tier limits, seat minimums and onboarding fees are silent, so it stops short of the 8 anchor. 2
The Skeptic
All three tiers carry real per-user numbers with both billing periods, VAT treatment and clean 30-day trial terms stated — better than most — but nothing published says what Basic, Pro or Enterprise actually contain, nor any seat minimums or annual discount, so the buyer can compute a price only after a sales call tells them which tier they need. 2
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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | 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.
- Weak sourcing — Ownership, Legal entity, Data residency, Subprocessors. 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.
- 74 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
- 20 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
- 13 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
- 11 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
- 9 hosting facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Vendor pricing page www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice www.tecart.de Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Security / trust page www.tecart.de Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Contact & data model — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Contact & data model — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →