whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

CRM

TecArt CRM

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 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 Migrator

Weighted verdict

Has moved a company off a CRM twice and remembers every scar. Optimizes for clean import with dedupe, full export of every object including notes and activity history, and contract terms that permit leaving. Rejects export behind support tickets and per-record API metering that makes exit a project.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Migrator

Contact & data model

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Pipeline & forecasting

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Automation & workflows

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Integrations & API

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Import, export & exit

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

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

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.

Do you know more about TecArt CRM? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (11)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Vendor pricing page www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.tecart.de Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Legal notice www.tecart.de Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Security / trust page www.tecart.de Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Contact & data model — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Contact & data model — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap www.tecart.de Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →