Design
CELUM
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by CELUM GmbH · www.celum.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
CELUM at a glance
- Vendor
- CELUM GmbH
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates CELUM 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. CELUM, from CELUM GmbH of Linz, Austria, is judged as a European digital asset management and brand content hub. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
CELUM, from CELUM GmbH of Linz, Austria, is judged as a European digital asset management and brand content hub. Its centre of gravity is brand asset governance, scored 6-7: brand portals, published guidelines, pre-approved templates with guardrails, a configurable multilingual taxonomy with AI tagging, copyright licence monitoring and usage analytics are all documented. Collaboration and handoff scores sit at 4, on markup-based feedback across images, videos, web pages, audio and documents, Kanban boards with due dates and role-based approvals, extended to partners, agencies and resellers. Weaknesses lie where the pages go quiet: AI and content rights scores 1-2, with no public information on models, providers, training on customer assets or commercial-use rights; file ownership and portability scores 2-3, with no documented file format or whole-library export found; design and prototyping scores 2-3, read as template production rather than design-system work; sovereignty scores 2-3, since EU residency evidence covers website access data on Microsoft Azure only. No criterion split the judges by more than a point; no prices are published and the visible path is a demo booking.
Speaks for it
- Brand asset governance scores 6-7, the bench's high mark, on documented brand portals, published guidelines, pre-approved templates with guardrails against off-brand use, and a configurable multilingual taxonomy with AI tagging.
- Collaboration and handoff scores sit at 4, on markup-based visual feedback across images, videos, web pages, audio and documents, Kanban boards with tasks and due dates, and role-based approvals.
- Templates import from Adobe InDesign, Illustrator or Photoshop or build directly in the tool, edited in a WYSIWYG editor and widget-based page builder, with downloads in different formats and sizes.
- Template distribution extends to partners, agencies and resellers inside and outside the organisation.
- Automatic copyright licence monitoring and facial-recognition metadata supporting GDPR and rights workflows are documented.
Held against it
- AI and content rights scores 1-2 — the pages document what the AI does, but we found no public information on training with customer assets, providers, processing locations, admin switches or commercial-use rights.
- File ownership and portability scores 2-3, offering asset-level downloads while we found no public information on a documented file format, whole-library export with structure, or terms after a cancelled contract.
- Design and prototyping scores 2-3 — we found no public information on reusable components, shared styles, tokens or any prototyping, so the bench reads this as template production.
- Handoff to engineering is unevidenced — we found no public information on a developer inspect mode, documented API or issue-tracker connection.
- Sovereignty scores 2-3 — the privacy policy places website access data on Microsoft Azure servers in the European Union, and we found no public information on where product files or AI processing are hosted, or on a subprocessor list.
Best for
- You run a multi-brand or manufacturing organisation and need a central brand hub with guidelines, portals and locked templates so non-designers create on-brand material.
- Your creative workflow needs structured review and approval — markup feedback across media types, Kanban boards and role-based approvals — with internal and external contributors.
- You distribute campaign content through partners, agencies and resellers who adapt pre-approved templates themselves.
- You already design artwork in Adobe InDesign or Photoshop and want it distributed as self-service templates with multi-format downloads.
Avoid if
- You are buying a design-system tool — components, variants, tokens or prototyping — since the bench reads this product as template-based content production.
- You need AI terms in writing — providers, processing locations, training commitments, admin switches or commercial-use rights — before AI features touch your assets.
- You need to hand design work to engineering through an inspect mode, code-linked components or a documented API.
- You must verify where product files and AI processing are hosted — the captured residency evidence covers website access data only.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Design, prototyping & design systems | 1.5 of 5 |
| Collaboration, review & developer handoff | 2 of 5 |
| Brand assets & governance | 3.5 of 5 |
| Files, formats & portability | 1.5 of 5 |
| AI features & rights to the work | 1 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
Design, prototyping & design systems
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The making itself: vector and layout tools, interactive prototypes, and the shared components, styles and tokens that keep a company's products and materials consistent — judged on what the feature and help pages document, not on showcase images.
0 — A single-purpose editor with no reusable components, no shared styles and no prototyping.
3 — Templates and basic shapes or layouts, with styles saved per file only and prototyping limited to linking screens.
5 — Reusable components and shared styles across files, responsive or auto layout, clickable prototypes with transitions, and team libraries that update where they are used.
8 — A design system managed in the tool: variables or tokens for colour, type and spacing with modes or themes, component variants and properties, prototypes with conditional logic, and library change notes with versions.
10 — The design system is a governed product: library releases versioned and reviewable, token export in a documented format for development, usage analytics per component, and accessibility checks such as contrast built into the editor.
The Product Designer
Templates can be imported from Adobe InDesign, Illustrator or Photoshop or built directly in the product, edited through a WYSIWYG editor and a widget-based page builder, and downloaded in multiple formats — genuine template capability for non-designers. We found no public information on reusable components with variants, design tokens or shared styles, or any interactive prototyping, so this stays at the template level rather than a managed design system. 5 6 10
The Frontend Engineer
The content-templates story is real — import from Adobe InDesign, Photoshop or Illustrator or build directly in CELUM, from social banners to product sheets, with a WYSIWYG editor and a widget-based page builder — but this is template filling, not design tooling. I found no public information on components, variants, colour/type/spacing tokens or any prototyping, let alone a documented token export for development. These pages show template production, not design-system management. 5 6 10
The Brand Marketer
The content-templates story is real: artwork imported from Adobe InDesign or Photoshop or built directly in CELUM, edited in a WYSIWYG editor and a widget-based page builder, from social banners to product sheets, and downloaded in several formats and sizes. But we found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or design tokens, or on any interactive prototyping, so this reads as template production rather than a design system. 5 6 10
The Agency Owner
Content templates can be imported from Adobe InDesign, Illustrator or Photoshop or built directly in CELUM with a WYSIWYG editor and a widget-based page builder, and finished pieces download in multiple formats and sizes. We found no public information on reusable components, shared styles across files, tokens or any prototyping — as a maker's tool this is template adaptation, not design-system work. 5 6 10
The Data Protection Officer
Templates can be imported from Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop or InDesign or built directly in the tool, with a WYSIWYG editor and a widget-based page builder for frontends and guides. Beyond that, the captured pages show no reusable components, shared styles or tokens, and no prototyping of any kind. 5 6 10
The Skeptic
Content templates can be imported from Adobe InDesign, Illustrator or Photoshop or built directly in the tool, with a WYSIWYG editor and widget-based page builder letting non-designers produce brand-safe output downloadable in different formats and sizes. We found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or tokens across files, or any prototyping — this is template-based content production, not a design system. 5 6 10
Collaboration, review & developer handoff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Working on the same files with colleagues, clients and developers: comments and review, permissions for internal and external people, and the handoff that gives engineering measurements, assets and code rather than screenshots.
0 — Files shared as exports or links with no comments, no permissions beyond view or edit, and no developer view.
3 — Real-time co-editing and comments, but external reviewers need a paid seat or full access, and developers get only exported images.
5 — Comments with mentions and resolution, view-only and comment-only access for guests without a paid seat, permissions per file and project, and an inspect mode with measurements, styles and asset export.
8 — Branching or review of changes before they reach the main file, version history with restore, a developer mode that links components to code, an API and plugins documented, and named integrations with issue trackers and code tools.
10 — Handoff is a contract between design and code: component properties mapped to code components, token and asset export automated through the API, an audit log of access and sharing, and external access governed by domain, expiry and admin policy.
The Product Designer
Review is real: multiple reviewers give markup feedback on images, videos, web pages, audio and documents, Kanban boards track tasks, due dates and status, role-based approval steps control who may release work, and templates reach partners, agencies and resellers inside and outside the organisation. We found no public information on a developer inspect mode with measurements, code-linked components, version history with restore, or documented API and plugins, which the stronger end of this criterion asks for. 8 6 12 1
The Frontend Engineer
Review is the strongest part: precise markup feedback on images, videos, web pages, audio and documents with multiple reviewers, kanban boards with tasks, due dates and statuses, role-based approvals and shared workrooms, plus template access for partners and agencies. The part I care about I could not find — I found no public information on an inspect mode with measurements and styles, a developer mode linking components to code, or a documented API and plugins. That lands between reviewers-and-images and a real handoff contract. 8 1 6 12
The Brand Marketer
Review and approval are well evidenced: visual feedback with markup on images, videos, web pages, audio and documents, multiple reviewers, Kanban boards with due dates, role-based approvals and configurable process steps, plus template distribution to partners, agencies and resellers. We found no public information on mention-and-resolve comment behaviour, on how guests and reviewers are seated or billed, or on any developer handoff such as an inspect mode, version history with restore, or documented API. 1 5 8 12
The Agency Owner
Review and approval are genuinely solid: visual feedback with markup on images, videos, web pages, audio and documents with multiple reviewers, Kanban boards with tasks and due dates, shared workrooms linking assets to tasks, and role-based approval steps. External partners, agencies and resellers can be given template access, but we found no public information on whether guests need a paid seat, or on any developer inspect mode with measurements, styles or code links. 1 5 6 8
The Data Protection Officer
Markup-based visual feedback with multiple reviewers, Kanban boards with due dates and status, shared workrooms and configurable role-based approvals are documented, and templates reach external partners, agencies and resellers. We found no public information on a developer inspect mode, documented APIs, comment resolution or how guest seats are billed, so handoff to engineering is entirely unevidenced. 6 8 12
The Skeptic
Visual feedback with markup across images, videos, web pages, audio and documents with multiple reviewers, Kanban boards with tasks and due dates, shared workrooms and role-based approvals are documented, as is content creation by partners, agencies and resellers. We found no public information on whether guest or reviewer access needs a paid seat, and none on a developer mode, documented API or issue-tracker handoff — integrations are named but not detailed. 8 6 1
Brand assets & governance
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Keeping a brand usable and correct across a company: a central library for logos, images and templates, brand guidelines people can find, locked templates that let non-designers produce material, and rights and expiry metadata on every licensed asset.
0 — No shared asset library; logos and images are uploaded per file by whoever needs them.
3 — A shared folder of assets and some templates, but no guidelines, no locking of brand elements and no metadata beyond file names.
5 — A central brand library with logos, colours and fonts, templates with locked elements for non-designers, brand guidelines published in the tool, and tagging and search across assets.
8 — Rights, usage and expiry metadata on assets with warnings or automatic withdrawal on expiry, approval workflows for new assets and template output, version control on assets, and access per team, market or partner.
10 — Brand governance is auditable: every asset carries its licence, owner and permitted use, usage of each asset is tracked across files and channels, distribution to external partners is logged, and the whole library with metadata is exportable in a documented format.
The Product Designer
This is the vendor's centre of gravity: a central hub with a configurable multilingual taxonomy and AI tagging, brand portals with a guideline page builder, locked templates so everyone creates brand-safe documents, approval workflows, usage analytics on branded content, and automatic monitoring of copyright licences with facial-recognition metadata supporting GDPR and rights workflows. We found no public information on asset version control or expiry-driven withdrawal of assets, which is what full auditability would add. 9 6 12 13 1
The Frontend Engineer
This is the product's centre: a central library for brand and non-brand content, brand portals with a guidelines page builder, approved templates so non-designers produce brand-safe documents, configurable taxonomy with tagging and search, and review-and-approval workflows for assets and template output. Copyright licence monitoring and facial recognition for rights and GDPR workflows point at rights metadata. I found no public information on asset version control or expiry warnings and automatic withdrawal of expired licences. 9 5 1 12 13
The Brand Marketer
This is the vendor's home ground and it shows: a central asset library, brand guidelines and portals built in the tool with a page builder, pre-approved templates that let non-designers produce on-brand material with guardrails against off-brand usage, tagging and search, approval workflows, automatic monitoring of copyright licences and facial recognition supporting rights and GDPR work. We found no public information on per-asset licence and expiry metadata with withdrawal warnings, on version control of assets, or on exportable licence metadata, which is exactly what I would need before trusting every stock image in twelve offices. 1 5 6 8 9 12 13
The Agency Owner
This is the vendor's home ground: a central asset library with a fully configurable multilingual taxonomy, automatic copyright-licence monitoring, facial recognition supporting GDPR and rights workflows, pre-approved templates that let non-designers produce brand-safe output, and brand guidelines and portals built with an in-tool page builder. We found no public information on asset version control or logged external distribution, which is what would separate this from fully auditable governance. 1 5 6 9 12 13
The Data Protection Officer
This is the vendor's home ground: a central library with tagging and search, guidelines built in the tool, approved templates that let non-designers produce on-brand material, automatic copyright licence monitoring, approval workflows and distribution to internal and external audiences are all documented. We found no public information on asset version control or automatic withdrawal when a licence expires, which keeps it below the auditable tier. 5 9 12 13
The Skeptic
Brand portals with a page builder, published brand guidelines, templates with pre-approval and guardrails against off-brand use, configurable multilingual taxonomy with AI tagging, and usage analytics on branded content are all documented — this is the product's centre of gravity. We found no public information on per-asset licence and expiry metadata with automatic withdrawal (copyright monitoring appears only via a marketplace integration), on version control for assets, or on export of the library with its metadata. 9 10 6 12
Files, formats & portability
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the work can leave: open or documented file formats, export that keeps layers, vectors and components, offline or self-hosted options, and what happens to files after a downgrade, a removed seat or a cancelled contract.
0 — Files exist only in the vendor's cloud in a proprietary format, export is a flat image, and nothing is said about files after cancellation.
3 — Export to PNG, PDF and SVG per frame, but no export of whole files with structure, and files after a downgrade or cancellation addressed only in general terms.
5 — Whole files exportable to a local or documented format, vector and layered export (SVG, PDF) with text kept as text, bulk export of a team's files, and a stated period during which files remain accessible after cancellation.
8 — An open or publicly documented file format, export and import with other tools documented, an API that reads full file structure, files of removed users transferred to the organisation by policy, and a stated deletion timeline after the contract ends.
10 — Portability is built in: an open-source or openly specified format, self-hosting or a local-first option, round-trip export without loss of components and prototypes, and the customer's ownership of all files and their export rights written into the terms.
The Product Designer
Finished content from templates downloads in different formats and sizes, and templates import from Adobe InDesign or Photoshop, with existing design files usable in the brand manager. We found no public information on whole-file export that keeps structure, a documented file format, an API that reads full file structure, or what happens to assets after a downgrade or cancelled contract. 5 6 10
The Frontend Engineer
Template output downloads in different formats and sizes, templates import from Adobe tools, and existing design files can be reused — that is asset-level portability. I found no public information on a documented file format, structured export of whole files, an API that reads file structure, or what happens to files after a downgrade or cancelled contract. As someone who wants the whole file rather than a rendered copy, that decides it for me. 5 6 10
The Brand Marketer
Finished template content can be downloaded in different formats and sizes, and integrations with Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office and FirstSpirit are documented. We found no public information on a documented or open file format, on bulk export of the library with structure, or on what happens to files after a downgrade, a removed seat or a cancelled contract. 2 5 6 12
The Agency Owner
Templated content downloads in different formats and sizes and templates import from Adobe tools, but we found no public information on whole-file export with structure intact, bulk export of a team's library, an open or documented file format, or self-hosting. Critically for how my agency hands work to clients, we found no public information on what happens to files after a downgrade or a cancelled contract. 5 6 11
The Data Protection Officer
Finished template content downloads in different formats and sizes, and named integrations with Adobe, Office and FirstSpirit move assets between systems. We found no public information on exporting whole files with their structure, a documented file format or API that reads file structure, and nothing on what happens to files after a downgrade, a removed seat or a cancelled contract. 5 6 12
The Skeptic
Template output can be downloaded in different formats and sizes, and templates import from Adobe InDesign or Photoshop, but these are asset-level downloads. We found no public information on a documented or open file format, whole-library or bulk export with structure, an API that reads file structure, self-hosting, or what happens to assets after a downgrade or cancelled contract. 5 6 12
AI features & rights to the work
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the vendor's AI does with the customer's files and what the customer may do with the AI's output: training on customer content and the opt-out, the models and where they run, commercial use of generated images, stock licences and indemnity.
0 — Generative features with no statement on training on customer files, no named models, and no word on whether output may be used commercially.
3 — An AI page that promises responsibility but leaves open whether customer files train models, and output rights are stated only for some features or only in community terms.
5 — Training on customer content excluded or opt-out documented, AI features switchable by an admin for the organisation, model providers named, and commercial use of generated output permitted in the terms.
8 — Training excluded by default for business plans, the processing location of AI features stated, generated content labelled or carrying content credentials, stock and template licences stated per asset type, and an IP indemnity for generated output on a named plan.
10 — AI is governed in writing: a per-feature list of models, providers and locations, admin controls per team and feature, a log of AI use, training exclusion and output ownership in the contract terms, and indemnity and licence limits published in full.
The Product Designer
The AI is documented feature by feature — image search, automatic tagging with translation into multiple languages, speech transcription for subtitles, text extraction, visual recommendations and full-text search across languages. We found no public information on which models or providers are used, where AI processing runs, whether customer files train models, per-feature admin controls, or rights to and commercial use of AI output, so the governance half of this criterion is unevidenced. 13 14 1
The Frontend Engineer
The AI pages are concrete about capability — image search, automatic tagging and translation, text extraction, speech transcription and a visual recommender — but I found no public information on named models or providers, training on customer content, processing location, or commercial-use, licence and indemnity terms. Analytical features with zero governance in writing sits just above the floor. 13 14 1
The Brand Marketer
The AI described on the pages we saw works over existing assets — image search, tagging, text and speech extraction, transcription, translation and a visual recommender — and we found no public information on generative image output, on whether customer content trains models, on named providers or processing locations, or on commercial-use rights and licences for AI output. On my trade-fair question, whether a generated image may go on the stand, the captured pages give no answer. 1 13 14
The Agency Owner
The AI is well documented as capability — image search, automatic tagging and translation, text extraction, speech transcription, a visual recommender — but every rights question is blank. We found no public information on whether customer assets train the models, which models or providers are used, where AI processing runs, admin switches, or terms covering commercial use and indemnity. 13 14
The Data Protection Officer
The AI pages document image search, automatic tagging, translation, transcription and facial recognition, the last framed as supporting GDPR rights management. We found no public information on whether customer files train models, which providers or locations process the AI features, admin controls to switch them off, or the commercial rights to generated output — nothing on training, models or rights anywhere we looked. 13 14
The Skeptic
The AI pages document image search, automatic tagging, translation, text extraction, speech transcription and facial recognition — but only what the AI does, never on what terms. We found no public information on whether customer assets train models, on providers or processing locations, on admin switches, on commercial-use rights for processed output, or on any indemnity. 13 14 1
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity is, where design files, brand assets and AI prompts are stored and processed, and which subprocessors touch them. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Non-EU contracting entity, no statement on where files are hosted, and subprocessors unnamed.
3 — EU data residency available only on an enterprise plan or not at all, or the subprocessor list is absent, or AI features send files outside the EU without an explained safeguard.
5 — EU hosting stated for files, a DPA available, but the contracting entity or significant parts of the chain (AI, rendering, support) are non-EU without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU contracting entity, files, assets and backups stored in the EU on named infrastructure, subprocessor list published with locations and purposes, and AI processing location stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity, every hosting, AI and support subprocessor European or optional, self-hosting or a European cloud offered, and certifications published.
The Product Designer
The captured pages state the product is built and headquartered in Europe, and the privacy policy says website access data is stored on Microsoft Azure servers in the European Union with CELUM itself storing no data. We found no public information on where the product's asset data and AI processing are hosted, on a subprocessor list with locations, or on a published data processing agreement, so the residency chain beyond the website is unverified. 2 3
The Frontend Engineer
The pricing page claims built and headquartered in Europe, and the privacy policy puts website data on Microsoft Azure servers in the European Union — but that statement covers the website, not the customer's assets. I found no public information on where product files and AI prompts are stored and processed, a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list with locations, or certifications. 2 3
The Brand Marketer
The vendor states it is built and headquartered in Europe, and website access data is stored on Microsoft Azure servers in the European Union. Beyond that we found no public information on where customer files, brand assets or AI processing are hosted, on the contracting entity, or on any subprocessor list, which is thin comfort for a European buyer. 2 3
The Agency Owner
The vendor presents itself as built and headquartered in Europe, the company is CELUM GmbH of Linz, Austria, and the privacy policy states website visitor data sits on Microsoft Azure in the European Union while saying CELUM itself stores no such data. That Azure statement covers website logs, not the product: we found no public information on where design files and brand assets are hosted, and no subprocessor list with locations and purposes. 2 3
The Data Protection Officer
European headquarters and an EU pedigree are claimed on the pricing page, and the privacy policy states that website log data sits on Microsoft Azure servers in the European Union — but that statement covers website access data only. We found no public information on where the product's files, assets or AI prompts are stored and processed, no subprocessor list, and no DPA, so the chain that actually touches customer work is undocumented. 2 3 13
The Skeptic
The pricing page claims "Built and headquartered in Europe!" and the privacy policy states that marketing-website data sits on Microsoft Azure in the EU — that is the whole of the residency evidence. We found no public information on where the product stores files and backups, on the contracting entity as captured, on a subprocessor list, or on where the AI features process assets. 2 3 13
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the annual cost for their team from public pages alone — which seat types exist and what each may do, how viewers and guests are billed, how seats are added and trued up, AI credits, and the plan where SSO, admin controls and brand features begin.
0 — No public prices at all; every plan is a sales conversation.
3 — A per-seat price for an entry plan, but the seat types, the billing of guests and reviewers, and the plan needed for business features are unclear.
5 — Plans priced per seat type with their main features, but at least one commonly incurred cost (seat upgrades on request, AI credits, storage, brand or SSO add-ons) is missing or "on request".
8 — Every plan and seat type priced, free viewers and guests stated with their limits, how and when added seats are billed explained, AI credits and storage priced or included explicitly, and the plan that unlocks SSO and admin controls named.
10 — Complete cost computability: annual cost derivable for a given mix of editors, viewers and guests, true-up and auto-upgrade rules published, every add-on priced publicly, and contract term, renewal and downgrade conditions stated.
The Product Designer
We found no public prices at all: the captured pricing page presents modules, scale claims and integrations without any figures for plans, seat types or guests, and the content-templates pages offer a demo booking as the next step. A buyer cannot compute any cost from the captured pages. 2 6 1
The Frontend Engineer
The captured pricing page names the modules — high-end DAM, review and workflow, frontends, content templates, CELUM AI, analytics, integrations — with no prices, seat types or billing rules on it, and the only path shown anywhere is booking a demo. A buyer cannot compute any cost from these pages, so this sits at the floor. 2 6
The Brand Marketer
The captured pricing page describes modules and scale without any figures, and the buying path offered is a demo booking. We found no public prices, seat types, guest or reviewer billing, AI credit terms, or rules for how and when added seats are billed, so an annual cost for a team cannot be computed from public pages. 2 6
The Agency Owner
We found no public information on prices: the captured pages show a module list and a demo-booking button, but no per-seat price, no seat types, no word on how viewers, guests or external partners are billed, and no indication of which plan carries admin controls. For a buyer, every cost here is a sales conversation. 1 2 6
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pricing page names modules and European roots but shows no figures for any plan or seat type, and the visible path is a demo booking. We found no public information on seat types, guest or viewer billing, add-on costs, or the plan where admin controls begin, so an annual cost cannot be computed from public pages. 2 6
The Skeptic
The captured pricing page lists modules and capability claims but contains no figures of any kind — no plans, no seat types, no per-seat prices — and the templates page's call to action is a demo booking. Every cost question is a sales conversation; a buyer cannot compute anything from these pages. 2 6
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 | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about CELUM
Is CELUM European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies CELUM as EU-Made.
Where does CELUM store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does CELUM have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to CELUM?
As of 16 Oct 2026, the panel rates Penpot (2.5/5), Sketch (2.5/5) and Frontify (2.5/5) highest among the other 13 Design products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Penpot (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: CELUM alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency, Legal entity. 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.
- 14 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
- 10 subprocessors 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 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 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
- 1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 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 (14)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Design, prototyping & design systems — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Design, prototyping & design systems — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Brand assets & governance — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Brand assets & governance — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 AI features & rights to the work — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 AI features & rights to the work — found from sitemap www.celum.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →