Customer Service & Helpdesk
HubSpot Service Hub
Rest of world Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by HubSpot, Inc. · www.hubspot.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
HubSpot Service Hub is a customer service and helpdesk platform whose strongest scoring area is omnichannel (7 to 9): email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp arrive in one helpdesk, agents switch channels inside the same ticket, and built-in calling logs itself automatically. Its weakest area is sovereignty (3 to 4): the contracting entity is HubSpot, Inc., HubSpot Ireland Limited appears only as data controller for EEA and UK website visitors, the German data centre comes only as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, and the subprocessor list sits in an annex of the data processing agreement. Ticketing core spread 5 to 7 and customer data protection 5 to 6, and no flagged split was flagged — the lower scores track missing public information on SLA breach warnings, search across ticket bodies, retention periods and an audit log of ticket access. Knowledge and self-service, integrations and pricing transparency sit at a flat 7, with prices, the required onboarding fees of 1.470 € and 3.420 €, and credit costs public; the captured pages nonetheless give different figures for the app count, auto-resolved conversations and the Customer Agent's free period.
Speaks for it
- Email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp arrive as tickets in one helpdesk, with conversation information preserved and channel switching inside the same ticket.
- Per-license prices are public for every tier with monthly and annual figures, alongside the required one-time onboarding fees of 1.470 € for Professional and 3.420 € for Enterprise.
- GDPR deletion is documented as irreversible with a warning if the deleted contact is re-added, and exports are machine-readable.
- A knowledge base agent analyses ticket data to detect gaps and drafts articles for team review before publishing, with limits of 2,000 articles at Professional and 10,000 at Enterprise.
- Named marketplace integrations include Jira, Slack, Facebook Messenger, Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall, with webhooks, custom objects, custom code actions, single sign-on and a sandbox.
Held against it
- The German data centre comes only as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, and the pages do not state where data is hosted by default beyond AWS infrastructure.
- The subprocessor list sits in an annex of the data processing agreement rather than on a public page, and the footers name HubSpot, Inc. as the contracting entity.
- The privacy policy states personal data may be processed to train HubSpot's AI models, and records identifiers sold or shared with advertising partners under the CCPA.
- We found no public information on SLA breach warnings, business-hours policies, escalation chains, ticket merge and split, or search across ticket bodies.
- Retention states no fixed period, and we found no public information on an audit log of who opened which ticket.
Best for
- You run email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp into one queue and want agents switching channels inside the same ticket.
- You want costs visible up front, from a free tier for up to 2 users to per-license prices and the required onboarding fees printed beside the plans.
- You want AI to draft knowledge base articles from ticket-data gaps for human review before publishing.
- You depend on marketplace integrations plus webhooks, custom objects and a sandbox for testing changes.
Avoid if
- You need EU hosting as standard — the German data centre is granted only as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, and the pages do not state where data is hosted by default.
- You need a publicly posted subprocessor list — it sits in an annex of the data processing agreement.
- Your compliance regime requires a fixed retention period — the published policy keeps data only until no ongoing legitimate business need remains.
- Your customer data must not feed vendor AI training — the privacy policy states personal data may be processed to train HubSpot's AI models.
The scores
Ticketing, queues & SLA
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The engine: how work is routed, prioritised, escalated and measured — and whether an agent can find the ticket they need among ten thousand.
0 — A shared mailbox with labels; no ownership, no status model, no history beyond the thread.
3 — Tickets with assignment and open/closed status, but routing is manual, there are no SLA timers and search covers subject lines only.
5 — Queues with rules-based routing, priorities, a working status model, SLA timers with breach warnings, and full-text search across ticket bodies.
8 — Business-hours-aware SLA policies per queue or customer, escalation chains, macros and triggers, merge and split, and reporting on first-response and resolution time by agent and queue.
10 — The workload is managed rather than merely tracked: capacity-aware assignment, SLA per contract with reporting an account manager could show a customer, audit of every status change, and search that finds the ticket from a half-remembered phrase.
The Support Lead
The helpdesk is evidenced with routing that assigns incoming tickets to teams and routes by agent skill, SLAs including conditional SLAs at the top tier, macros by plan, custom reporting, and routing with capacity planning named at Enterprise. But the machinery I live on — timers with breach warnings, business-hours-aware policies, escalation chains, merge and split, and first-response and resolution reporting by agent and queue — we found no public information on any of it. 2 6 2
The Agent Advocate
Queues organised by team, rules-based and skills-based routing, SLAs with conditional ones from Enterprise, 500 to 1,500 macros depending on tier, and Enterprise routing and capacity planning — that is a real engine, and custom reports exist at the top tier. What I found no public information on is the thing an agent uses a hundred times a day — search across ticket bodies — and equally on merge and split, breach warnings, and first-response and resolution reporting by agent and queue. 2 6 2
The Data Protection Officer
Routing rules that assign incoming tickets by team and by agent skills, SLAs including conditional SLAs at the top tier, published macro limits and helpdesk areas for team organisation are all evidenced, and Enterprise adds routing and capacity planning. I found no public information on business-hours-aware policies, escalation chains, ticket merge and split, or search across ticket bodies. 2 6 2
The Shop Operator
Assignment of incoming tickets to the right team, skills-based routing, macros with published limits, SLAs including conditional ones, and Enterprise routing with capacity planning are all evidenced. We found no public information on business-hours SLA policies, escalation chains, ticket merge and split, or first-response and resolution reporting by agent and queue, so I stop below the strongest anchors. 2 6 2
The Integrator
Ticket automation, skills-based routing and team-based organisation are stated, SLAs exist with conditional SLAs reserved for the Enterprise tier, and macros, helpdesk areas, custom reports and dashboards carry published per-tier limits. Enterprise additionally promises sophisticated routing and capacity planning, which reads as capacity-aware assignment. I found no public information on business-hours-aware SLA policies, escalation chains, ticket merge and split, or an audit of every status change. 2 2 6 2
The Skeptic
Routing is real — incoming tickets are assigned by team and forwarded by agent skill, macros run from Professional, and routing and capacity planning are reserved for Enterprise — and SLAs appear in the comparison table, conditional SLAs only at Enterprise. What I could not find on any captured page: SLA breach warnings, business-hours policies, priorities, escalation chains, merge and split, full-text search across ticket bodies, or first-response and resolution reporting by agent and queue. 2 6 2
Channels in one queue
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Email, chat, phone, portal, messengers and social — judged on what actually lands in the same queue with the same history, not on how many channel logos the marketing page carries.
0 — Email only.
3 — Email plus one more channel, but the second lives in its own inbox: no shared history, and a customer who switches channel starts again.
5 — Email, a web form or portal and live chat all landing as tickets in one queue, with the customer's history visible whichever channel they used.
8 — The above plus telephony integration with call logging, at least one messenger (WhatsApp, Signal or similar) with its consent handling stated, and a customer portal where a requester can see their own tickets.
10 — Channel is an implementation detail: every channel including voice and messengers writes to one conversation with one history, agents answer from one screen, and the customer can move between channels mid-issue without repeating themselves.
The Support Lead
Email, live chat, telephony with automatic call logging and optional recording, and WhatsApp all land in the helpdesk, with all conversation information preserved and channel switching inside the same ticket; a customer portal is named at the Professional tier. We found no public information on consent handling for the messenger channel, which is the piece that would close the full telephony-plus-messenger-plus-portal package. 2 2 6 2
The Agent Advocate
Email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp all arrive as tickets, the pages state conversation information is preserved so the team can switch channels within the same ticket, and built-in calling logs itself automatically. A customer portal ships from Professional and channel APIs exist for anything unusual. I found no public information on consent handling specific to WhatsApp; the stated consent notices cover live chat, forms and meetings. 2 2 6
The Data Protection Officer
Email, live chat, forms, built-in calling with automatic call logging, WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger land as tickets, the captured pages state all conversation information is preserved and the team can switch channels within the same ticket, and a customer portal is confirmed at the Professional tier. Consent handling is stated for forms and live chat, but I found no public information on consent handling for the messenger channels themselves. 2 2 6 8
The Shop Operator
Email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp are evidenced in one product, the team can switch channels within the same ticket with all conversation information preserved, built-in calling logs activities automatically, and a customer portal ships from Professional — the single-queue test my parcel customers put on us. We found no public information on consent handling stated for the WhatsApp channel specifically, so I hold just under the top. 2 2 6
The Integrator
Email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp land in one helpdesk, and the vendor states that all conversation information is preserved so the team can switch channels within the same ticket. Built-in calling from tickets logs calls automatically, WhatsApp carries a stated monthly message limit, and a customer portal is named alongside private knowledge-base access groups. I found no public information on consent handling specific to the messenger channel — the consent tooling named covers forms, live chat and meetings. 2 2 6
The Skeptic
The channel logos are backed by substance: email, live chat, phone and WhatsApp are named, conversation details are preserved and the team can switch channels within the same ticket, calling is built in with automatic logging, and a customer portal starts at Professional. Two caveats a buyer should hear — WhatsApp begins only at Professional with 1,000 messages a month, and we found no public information on consent handling for the messenger channels. 2 2 6
Knowledge base & deflection
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the product reduces the number of tickets as well as organising them: public help centre, article workflow, suggestions to agents and to customers.
0 — No knowledge base; answers live in agents' heads and old tickets.
3 — A basic article list, public or internal, with no editorial workflow, no versioning and no link between articles and tickets.
5 — A searchable public help centre with categories, draft and publish states, and agents able to insert an article into a reply.
8 — Article suggestions to the customer before they submit and to the agent while they answer, multilingual articles, review dates that flag stale content, and reporting on which articles deflect.
10 — Knowledge is a managed asset: gaps identified from unanswered tickets, article performance measured against ticket volume by topic, versioned content with approval, and deflection reported as a number the team can act on.
The Support Lead
The knowledge base is tiered by article and database count, and the AI knowledge base agent works from gaps it detects in ticket data to draft articles a human reviews before publishing — gap-driven content creation is genuinely strong. Deflection appears as a headline auto-resolution figure, but we found no public information on per-article deflection reporting, review dates flagging stale content, or multilingual articles. 2 2 7 2
The Agent Advocate
A knowledge base agent analyses tickets and customer interactions to find gaps and drafts articles a human reviews before publishing, while a customer agent deflects with a published auto-resolve share — the captured pages give different figures for it, 70%+ against 65%+. I found no public information on multilingual articles, review dates that flag stale content, or reporting on which articles deflect; the number published is the agent's, not the articles'. 2 2 7 2
The Data Protection Officer
The knowledge base carries published limits per tier, and an agent that analyses tickets to detect knowledge gaps and generates draft articles the team reviews before publishing, together with a published auto-resolution figure of 70-plus percent of conversations, treats knowledge as a measured asset. I found no public information on multilingual articles, stale-content review dates, or reporting on which articles actually deflect. 2 2 7 2
The Shop Operator
A knowledge base with published article limits, a knowledge base agent that mines tickets for gaps and drafts articles for team review, AI reply recommendations for agents, and a customer agent that resolves conversations before a human sees them are the deflection machinery my December queue needs. We found no public information on multilingual articles, stale-content review flags, or reporting on which articles deflect, and the captured pages give different figures for auto-resolved conversations. 2 6 7
The Integrator
A knowledge-base agent analyses tickets and customer interactions to detect knowledge gaps and generates draft articles the team reviews before publishing, and the AI customer agent resolves requests across chat, email, forms and calls, with claimed deflection figures published. Reply recommendations for agents and article limits per tier are also stated. I found no public information on multilingual articles, review dates that flag stale content, or in-product reporting on which articles deflect; the seventeen languages quoted are interface languages. 2 6 7 2
The Skeptic
The knowledge base is tiered by size (2,000 articles at Professional, 10,000 at Enterprise) and the Knowledge Base Agent is described as finding gaps from ticket data and drafting articles for team review before publishing — a workflow, not just an article list. The deflection number, though, belongs to the credit-metered Customer Agent at 50 credits per resolved conversation from Professional upward, the captured pages give different figures for auto-resolved conversations (65-plus and 70-plus percent), and we found no public information on review dates flagging stale content or reporting on which articles deflect. 2 2 7 2
Customer data protection
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
A ticket archive is personal data written by the data subject. Retention, deletion, access control, subject rights, and what the vendor does with attachments — judged on what executes rather than what is promised.
0 — No retention policy stated, no deletion path, agents all see everything, and no DPA is published.
3 — A DPA on request and coarse roles; deletion is described as something the customer arranges, and there is no stated retention period.
5 — A signable DPA published, configurable agent roles and queue-level visibility, a stated retention period, and deletion of a requester's data that can actually be executed.
8 — Automatic retention rules per queue or data category, attachment handling stated, an audit log of who opened which ticket, documented support for access and erasure requests, and pseudonymisation or redaction of ticket content.
10 — Built for a data-protection audit: retention executed and evidenced per category, field-level redaction, full audit trail, subprocessor list published, and the vendor's own support access to customer instances documented and consent-gated.
The Support Lead
A data processing agreement sits inside the published terms, GDPR deletion is irreversible and warns if a deleted contact is re-added, and access and portability requests are executable through machine-readable exports — subject rights are product features here, not promises. We found no public information on a stated retention period, automatic retention rules, attachment handling, or an audit log of who opened which ticket, so this stops short of audit-ready. 3 3 8 9
The Agent Advocate
The data processing agreement is included in the terms of service, GDPR deletion of a contact is irreversible and warns if the record is re-added, exports are machine-readable, and consent evidence — copy of the notice, type, timestamp — is actually stored. The stated retention approach is deletion or anonymisation when there is no ongoing legitimate business need, with no fixed period, and I found no public information on automatic retention rules, an audit log of who opened which ticket, attachment handling or redaction. The policy also states identifiers have been sold or shared with advertising partners under the CCPA and that usage data may train HubSpot's own AI — vendor-side processing, but it belongs in the reading. 3 8 9 2
The Data Protection Officer
The processing agreement sits inside the customer terms with standard contractual clauses, and GDPR deletion is documented as irreversible, with re-import warnings, purged notifications, machine-readable export and correction in the contact record — rights support I can see executing. Beyond configurable permissions and advanced permissions at the top tier, I found no public information on automatic retention rules per queue, attachment handling, an audit log of who opened which ticket, redaction of ticket content, or whether vendor support can open a customer ticket; and the vendor states it may process personal data to develop and train its own AI models, which an archive owner must weigh carefully. 3 6 8 9 2
The Shop Operator
Irreversible GDPR-compliant deletion with warnings on re-import, machine-readable export, consent evidence stored with a copy of the notice and timestamp, contact editing on request, and a DPA with SCCs inside the customer terms are executed features, not promises. We found no public information on configurable retention rules per queue, an audit log of who opened which ticket, or attachment handling, no fixed retention period is stated, and the privacy policy says personal data may be used to train HubSpot's AI models — something I want spelled out before a support archive lives there. 3 8 9
The Integrator
The GDPR playbook documents executable, irreversible deletion with a warning on re-import, machine-readable exports, consent evidence storage and lawful-basis tracking, and a data processing agreement with standard contractual clauses sits inside the customer terms. The retention statement names only processing until there is no ongoing legitimate business need, with no fixed period. I found no public information on automatic retention rules per queue, attachment handling, an audit log of who opened which ticket, or redaction of ticket content. 3 3 8 9
The Skeptic
This executes more than it promises in places: the DPA is included in the Customer Terms with SCCs for EU customers, GDPR deletion is described as irreversible with a warning if the deleted contact is re-added, and export, correction and consent-evidence storage are documented step by step. But retention has no stated period anywhere we read — deletion waits until the business need ends — anonymised analytics survive the GDPR deletion, and we found no public information on an audit log of who opened which ticket, attachment handling, or retention rules per queue or data category. 3 8 9
Integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The systems a helpdesk has to reach — CRM, shop, order management, identity — and whether the API is documented for building or gated behind a partner conversation.
0 — No API and no named integrations; context is copied in by hand.
3 — A handful of native integrations and a read-mostly API, with no webhooks and no documented rate limits.
5 — Named integrations for common CRM and shop systems, a documented REST API with keys, webhooks for the core ticket events, and SSO.
8 — Maintained bidirectional integrations, customer context from other systems shown inside the ticket, SCIM provisioning, documented rate limits and a sandbox.
10 — A component rather than a destination: versioned API with a deprecation policy, event streaming both directions, an app framework for in-ticket extensions, and integrations the vendor maintains rather than lists.
The Support Lead
A marketplace with roughly two thousand apps (the captured pages give different counts), bidirectional data sync, webhooks, custom objects, custom code actions, SSO, a sandbox and developer APIs are all evidenced, with CRM context living inside the ticket by design. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, documented rate limits, or an API deprecation policy. 2 6 9 2
The Agent Advocate
Jira, Slack and Facebook Messenger are named, webhooks, custom objects and custom code actions are documented, data synchronisation with dozens of apps runs bidirectionally, and SSO and a sandbox are in the tier lists. The captured pages give different figures for the marketplace — 1,800+, 1,900+ and 2,000+ — which I note without choosing. I found no public information on SCIM provisioning, documented rate limits, or an API versioning and deprecation policy. 2 2 6 2
The Data Protection Officer
A marketplace with roughly two thousand apps, bidirectional data synchronisation, webhooks, custom objects and custom code actions, single sign-on and a sandbox are publicly evidenced, alongside named connections such as Jira, Slack and Aircall. I found no public information on SCIM provisioning, documented rate limits, or an API versioning and deprecation policy. 2 6 2
The Shop Operator
A marketplace of roughly 1,900 to 2,000 apps, webhooks, custom objects, a custom channel API, bidirectional data sync with dozens of apps, SSO and a sandbox account cover most of my shop plumbing. We found no public information on documented rate limits or SCIM provisioning, and no shop or order system is named on the captured pages — order context rests on the built-in CRM and custom objects rather than a named connector. 2 6 2
The Integrator
Almost my whole checklist is on the page: around 1,900 prebuilt marketplace integrations with Jira, Slack, Facebook Messenger, Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall named, bidirectional data sync with dozens of apps, webhooks, custom objects, custom code actions, a custom channel API for any messaging or voice platform, single sign-on and a sandbox for testing changes. What holds me back is the fine print: I found no public information on SCIM user provisioning, documented API rate limits, webhook retry behaviour, or a versioning and deprecation policy. The developer documentation referenced on the captured pages covers Content Hub rather than the service APIs. 2 4 6 2
The Skeptic
The captured pages give different figures for the app count — over 1,800, over 1,900, over 2,000 — but whichever holds, Jira, Slack, Facebook Messenger, Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall are named, webhooks, custom objects and custom code actions are documented, and bidirectional data sync, a sandbox and SSO are listed. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, documented rate limits, or an API versioning and deprecation policy. 2 6 2
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the ticket archive lives, who the contracting entity is, which subprocessors touch it, and whether vendor support can read customer data. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated or non-EU, subprocessors unnamed.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — support tooling, analytics, AI features — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, EU contracting entity, full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, certification published, and a self-hosted or private-cloud option for buyers who need the archive on their own infrastructure.
The Support Lead
The contracting entity is HubSpot, Inc. of the United States, with the Ireland entity named only as data controller for website visitors; the German data centre comes as a paid upgrade, we found no public information on where data is hosted by default, and the infrastructure runs on AWS with affiliates as subprocessors listed only in an agreement annex. Documented standard contractual clauses and Data Privacy Framework certifications keep this above the bare minimum. 2 3 3 4
The Agent Advocate
The footer names HubSpot, Inc., and the European data centre in Germany comes only as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, with the default hosting region unstated beyond AWS infrastructure. HubSpot Ireland Limited is named solely as data controller for website visitors, and the affiliates acting as subprocessors are pointed to an annex of the data processing agreement rather than shown on these pages. Standard contractual clauses and the Data Privacy Framework are stated for transfers — a safeguard, but not European hosting as standard. 2 3 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
The footers contract with HubSpot, Inc., the German data centre arrives only as a paid upgrade to the Starter plan, no capture states where data is hosted by default, and the product runs on AWS with no stated region. Standard contractual clauses and the Data Privacy Framework certifications are published, but the AI features are powered by external large language models with no named processor or location, affiliates act as subprocessors, and the privacy text references further unnamed service providers. 2 3 3 4 7
The Shop Operator
The vendor is HubSpot, Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts, the platform runs on AWS with the default hosting region unstated, and the German data centre arrives only as a paid upgrade on the Starter version — the archive does not stay in the EU unless I pay for it. HubSpot Ireland Limited is named as controller for EEA and UK website visitors, SCCs sit in the DPA and affiliates act as subprocessors with a list in an annex, but we found no public information on the full subprocessor chain or where support tooling and the LLM-backed AI features process ticket content. 3 3 4
The Integrator
The contracting entity in the page footers is HubSpot, Inc. of the United States, with HubSpot Ireland Limited named only as data controller for website visitors in the EEA and UK. EU data residency in a German data center comes solely as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, the default hosting region is not stated, the platform runs on AWS, and the subprocessor list sits in an annex of the data processing agreement rather than on a public page. The certifications named are the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework set, which rests on U.S. enforcement. 2 3 3 4
The Skeptic
HubSpot, Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts is the vendor; HubSpot Ireland Limited appears only as controller for EEA and UK website visitors, not as the named contracting entity on the product pages. The German data centre comes with the paid Starter upgrade, we found no public information on where data sits by default beyond AWS infrastructure, and the affiliate subprocessor list lives in an annex of the DPA rather than on a published page. SCCs and Data Privacy Framework certification are stated as transfer mechanisms. 2 3 3 4
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a support lead can compute the real annual invoice for their agent count — including the channels and features they actually need — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A per-agent headline exists, but the tier where the needed channel or SLA feature begins is unstated, or light-agent and contact limits are not mentioned.
5 — Per-agent prices public for the main tiers with billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed capability (telephony, messengers, SLA policies) sits in an unpriced bundle.
8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with per-agent maths, billing period, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom enterprise work lacks a number.
10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table producing the annual invoice for a given agent count and channel selection, including usage-metered channels and overage.
The Support Lead
Every tier carries a public per-license price from the free plan through "Ab 150 €/Monat/Lizenz", annual versus monthly rates are shown, the required one-time onboarding fees of 1.470 € and 3.420 € are disclosed, and AI usage is metered in credits at "9,00 € pro 1.000 Guthabeneinheiten bei jährlicher Zahlung" with per-action rates published. We found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, or overage beyond the published channel limits, and the captured pages give different lengths for the free AI-agent trial. 2 2 2
The Agent Advocate
All four tiers carry public per-license prices — 0 €/Monat, 'Ab 7 €/Monat/Lizenz', 'Ab 90 €/Monat/Lizenz', 'Ab 150 €/Monat/Lizenz' — with monthly and annual figures, required onboarding fees stated exactly at 1.470 € and 3.420 €, Guthabeneinheiten at 9,00 € pro 1.000, and metered usage such as 50 Guthabeneinheiten per resolved conversation. A support lead can get close to the real annual invoice from these pages alone. I found no public information on VAT treatment or minimum term, there is no calculator for usage-metered overage, and the captured pages give different figures for the Customer Agent trial, 14 against 28 days. 2 2 2
The Data Protection Officer
Every tier carries a public per-license price with monthly and annual figures, the required one-time onboarding fees are printed beside the plans, and the AI-agent credit meter is priced at 9,00 € per 1.000 credits with 50 credits per resolved conversation — enough to get close to the annual invoice. VAT treatment, minimum term and the price of the EU data-centre upgrade are not stated, and I found no calculator producing the annual total. 2 2 4
The Shop Operator
Every tier carries a public per-license price with both billing periods — free for up to 2 users, Starter from 7 €/Monat/Lizenz, Professional ab 90 €/Monat/Lizenz, Enterprise ab 150 €/Monat/Lizenz — and the extras are priced too: credits at 9,00 € pro 1.000 Guthabeneinheiten, the customer agent at 50 credits per resolved conversation, and required one-time onboarding of 1.470 € and 3.420 €. We found no public information on VAT treatment or a stated minimum term, no calculator that produces the annual invoice, and the captured pages give different trial lengths for the customer agent. 2 2 2
The Integrator
Per-license prices are public for every tier with the billing options quoted exactly — from Ab 7 €/Monat/Lizenz through Ab 90 €/Monat/Lizenz and 100 €/Monat/Lizenz to Ab 150 €/Monat/Lizenz — alongside required one-time onboarding fees of 1.470 € for Professional and 3.420 € for Enterprise, credits at 9,00 € pro 1.000 Guthabeneinheiten, and per-tier limits for calling minutes, phone numbers and WhatsApp messages. I cannot compute the real annual invoice from the pages alone: I found no public information on VAT treatment, a minimum term, or overage pricing once the included minutes and messages run out. The captured pages also give different figures for the free Customer Agent access window, fourteen days against twenty-eight. 2 2 2
The Skeptic
Per-agent prices are public for every tier with both billing modes, the required one-time onboarding fees (1.470 € Professional, 3.420 € Enterprise) are disclosed, and credit pricing at 9,00 € per 1,000 credits makes the metered AI legible — the Customer Agent costs 50 credits per resolved conversation. The gaps: the captured pages give different figures for the Customer Agent's free period (14 days versus 28), we found no public information on VAT treatment or minimum term, and nothing prices WhatsApp beyond 1,000 messages a month or produces the annual invoice for a given agent count. 2 2 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
3 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 | Incorporated in IE ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 3 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU optional ⚠ unverified | 1/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 4 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 31 Aug 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. Die Seite nennt HubSpot Ireland Limited nur als Datenschutz-Verantwortlichen für EEA-/UK-Besucher und nennt kein Register; die Footer nennen lediglich "HubSpot, Inc." ohne Länderangabe.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. The EU data center is granted only as a paid upgrade to the Starter version, no excerpt states where data is hosted by default, and the product runs on AWS infrastructure.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. AWS is named as the hosting provider but the server region is not stated, and the privacy policy (S1) references further unnamed service providers and HubSpot Affiliates acting as subprocessors.
- 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.
- 78 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
- 35 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
- 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
- 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
- 2 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
- 2 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
Sources (9)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Product page www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 15 Sep 2026, 31 Aug 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 28 Sep 2026, 15 Sep 2026, 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy legal.hubspot.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Security / trust page www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Privacy policy www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Channels in one queue — found from sitemap www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Knowledge base & deflection — found from sitemap www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Customer data protection — found from sitemap www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Customer data protection — found from sitemap www.hubspot.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →