Design
Conceptboard
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Conceptboard Cloud Service GmbH · conceptboard.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.
Conceptboard at a glance
- Vendor
- Conceptboard Cloud Service 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
- Starting price
- “5€ / user / month Starter” (vendor’s words) source, captured 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Conceptboard 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Conceptboard, an online whiteboard for ideas, tasks and projects hosted in Germany, scored highest on sovereignty (5 to 7) and file ownership and portability (4 to 7), and lowest on design and prototyping (a uniform 2) and AI and content rights (0 to 2). how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Oct 2026 to 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
Conceptboard, an online whiteboard for ideas, tasks and projects hosted in Germany, scored highest on sovereignty (5 to 7) and file ownership and portability (4 to 7), and lowest on design and prototyping (a uniform 2) and AI and content rights (0 to 2). The rationales describe a workshop canvas — templates, Kanban workflows, live moderation with timer and voting — and report no public information on components, styles, tokens, prototyping or AI features. The judges genuinely split on file ownership and portability: the rationales credit the self-hosted Data Center Edition, an OCI-compliant bundle runnable fully air-gapped, but weigh differently the absence of public information on export formats, a documented file format and customer file ownership; the terms grant the vendor a broad, sub-licensable licence to user content. Pricing transparency (2 to 3) is held down by a pricing page with plan limits but no per-seat price figure. Sovereignty rests on stated German hosting (AWS Germany included; IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee); the collected sovereignty attributes leave contracting entity, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure unconfirmed.
Speaks for it
- A Data Center Edition for self-hosting, delivered as an OCI-compliant deployment bundle running containerized on Kubernetes and helm charts, with a fully air-gapped mode
- Customer-controlled update timing, with the professional templates also available in the self-hosted edition
- Stated hosting in Germany on named infrastructure — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus a dedicated server option and availability via Marktplatz Deutschland Digital (formerly DVC)
- Real-time or asynchronous collaboration with tasks, comments and annotations, role- and permission-based access control, and named integrations including Microsoft Teams, Confluence, Webex, Google Drive, Dropbox and OneDrive
- A published plan matrix with a free plan of three active boards, 100 objects per board and 250 MB storage rising to unlimited storage, and payment by credit card or invoice
Held against it
- We found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or design tokens, or on prototyping of any kind
- We found no public information on AI features, named models or providers, training on customer content, or rights to generated output
- We found no public information on per-seat prices, seat types, or how guests and reviewers are billed, so an annual team cost cannot be computed
- We found no public information on export formats, a documented file format, or what happens to boards after a downgrade or cancellation
- We found no public information on a central brand library, locked templates for non-designers, or rights, usage and expiry metadata on assets
Best for
- You need a shared workshop canvas for brainstorming, campaign planning, Kanban and retrospectives with live moderation, timer and voting
- Your organization must run its collaboration tool self-hosted or fully air-gapped on its own Kubernetes infrastructure with customer-controlled update timing
- You are a German public-sector team procuring via Marktplatz Deutschland Digital (formerly DVC) with hosting in Germany on named infrastructure
- You collaborate with agencies and freelancers on shared boards with role- and permission-based access control
Avoid if
- You need production design tooling — vector or layout tools, reusable components, team libraries, prototypes and a developer inspect mode — rather than a workshop whiteboard
- You must budget from published per-seat prices before committing; the captured pricing page shows plan limits but we found no public information on any price figure
- You need a central brand library with locked templates for non-designers and rights, usage and expiry metadata on licensed assets
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Design, prototyping & design systems | 1 of 5 |
| Collaboration, review & developer handoff | 2 of 5 |
| Brand assets & governance | 1 of 5 |
| Files, formats & portability | 3 of 5 |
| AI features & rights to the work | 0 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 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, an object-based board (with per-board object limits) and marketing workflows like mood boards and visual guidelines are documented, but I found no public information on reusable components, shared styles, interactive prototypes, or any tokens, variants or team libraries. For a design system owner this reads as a workshop canvas, not a tool where a governed component library could live. 2 8 9
The Frontend Engineer
This is a whiteboard, not a design tool: templates for briefings, campaigns and journey mapping, Kanban workflows, and a free plan capped at 100 objects per board. I found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or design tokens, and nothing on interactive prototyping at all — not even linking screens. For the design-system half there is simply nothing to build against. 1 2 8 9
The Brand Marketer
The captured pages document an online whiteboard — templates for brainstorming and campaign planning, Kanban workflows, live moderation, timer and voting. We found no public information on vector or layout tools, reusable components, shared styles or design tokens, or any prototyping, which is precisely the machinery that keeps one brand's materials consistent across my twelve offices. 1 2 8
The Agency Owner
The captured pages position this as an online whiteboard for ideas, tasks and projects, with templates for briefings, mood boards and kanban planning. We found no public information on vector or layout tools, reusable components, shared styles or team libraries, and nothing on prototyping of any kind — I could not run client design work here. 8 1
The Data Protection Officer
The documented product is an online whiteboard with templates and visual workflows such as Kanban and retrospectives; we found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or tokens, or interactive prototyping. Mood boards and creative briefings are described as team use cases rather than a managed design system. 1 8 9
The Skeptic
The captured pages describe an online whiteboard — templates, kanban workflows, brainstorming and workshop facilitation with timers, voting and live moderation — and we found no public information on reusable components, shared styles or tokens, or any prototyping. Mood boards and design briefings appear as workshop use cases for marketing teams, not as a design system managed in the tool. 1 8 9 2
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
Real-time and asynchronous work with tasks, comments and annotations, role- and permission-based access control, and named integrations with Teams, Confluence and Webex are documented. I found no public information on comment mentions and resolution, guest access without a paid seat, version history with restore, or any inspect or developer mode that would hand engineering measurements, styles or code — so handoff stays at screenshot level. 6 8 1
The Frontend Engineer
Co-editing in real time or asynchronously, comments, tasks, annotations and role- and permission-based access control are documented, and working with agencies and freelancers is an explicit use case. On the developer side I found no public information on an inspect mode, measurements, asset export or any developer mode linking components to code; the terms confirm programmatic API access is permitted, but no documented API surface appears in the captured pages. The named integrations are conferencing and storage tools (Teams, Webex, Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Confluence), and I found no issue tracker among them. 5 6 8 9 1
The Brand Marketer
Real-time and asynchronous co-editing, comments, tasks and annotations, role- and permission-based access control, and working with agencies and freelancers are all documented, alongside named integrations for Teams, Webex, Confluence and the cloud drives. We found no public information on view-only or comment-only guest access without a paid seat, version history with restore, or a developer inspect view with measurements and code, so the handoff side is not evidenced. 6 8 9 1
The Agency Owner
Real-time or asynchronous collaboration with comments, tasks and annotations is documented, together with role- and permission-based access control and a use case for working with agencies and freelancers. But we found no public information on comment-only or view-only guests without a paid seat, and nothing developer-facing — no inspect mode, measurements or code-linked handoff; the named integrations are storage, conferencing and Confluence embeds. 6 8 1
The Data Protection Officer
Real-time and asynchronous collaboration with tasks, comments and annotations is documented, together with role- and permission-based access and collaboration with agencies and freelancers. We found no public information on comment mentions and resolution, guest access without a paid seat, or any developer or inspect mode; the only word on programmatic access is a clause in the terms confirming interfaces and APIs exist. 5 6 8 1
The Skeptic
Real-time and asynchronous work on shared boards with comments, tasks and annotations, role- and permission-based access control, agency and freelancer collaboration, and named integrations for Teams, Confluence, Webex and the cloud drives are all documented. But we found no public information on a developer view, measurements or code handoff, version history or branching, and the interfaces for programmatic access are name-checked in the terms rather than documented. 3 5 6 8 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
Professional templates — also available in the self-hosted edition — and embedding files from Drive, Dropbox and OneDrive give a marketing team a shared canvas for briefings and guidelines. I found no public information on a central brand library of logos, colours and fonts, locked template elements, published brand guidelines, or any rights, usage and expiry metadata on assets. 8 9 10
The Frontend Engineer
Templates for design briefings, mood boards and campaign planning are there, and marketing teams can define visual guidelines on a board. I found no public information on a central brand library of logos, colours and fonts, on locked elements for non-designers, or on any rights, usage and expiry metadata for assets. It reads as shared templates without the governance layer. 8 9
The Brand Marketer
Templates and per-plan storage with upload size limits are documented, but we found no public information on a central brand library for logos, colours and fonts, on locked template elements that would let my sales offices safely produce their own flyers, on guidelines published inside the tool, or on licence, usage and expiry metadata for stock images. Without rights and expiry data on every licensed asset, brand correctness here rests on people rather than the product. 2 8 9
The Agency Owner
What the marketing-team pages evidence is templates for campaigns and editorial planning and mood boards for creative briefings. We found no public information on a central brand library, locked templates for non-designers, published guidelines, or rights and expiry metadata on assets — for a brand account this is templates and nothing governable. 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
Templates and use cases for mood boards, visual guidelines and campaign planning are published, but we found no public information on a central brand library, locked elements for non-designers, or rights and expiry metadata on assets. Content arrives through Dropbox, Google Drive and OneDrive integrations rather than a governed library. 8 9
The Skeptic
Templates and the ability to embed Dropbox, Google Drive and OneDrive content on boards are documented, and the marketing pages promise mood boards and visual guidelines as workshop material. We found no public information on a central brand library, locked templates for non-designers, guidelines published in the tool, or any rights, usage and expiry metadata on assets. 8 9
Files, formats & portability
panel disagrees
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
The Data Center Edition is a genuine exit path: self-hosted on the customer's own infrastructure, delivered as an OCI-compliant bundle with Kubernetes and helm charts, runnable air-gapped, with customer-controlled update timing and programmatic interfaces mentioned in the terms. I found no public information on export formats, an open or documented file format, bulk export of a team's boards, or what happens to files after a downgrade or cancellation. 10 11 5
The Frontend Engineer
The self-hosting story is unusually complete: a Data Center Edition delivered as an OCI-compliant deployment bundle with container images and an operations manual, running containerized on Kubernetes and helm charts, fully air-gappable in closed networks, with data in your own PostgreSQL database and S3-compatible object storage. Against that, I found no public information on a documented file format, layered or bulk export, or an API that reads full file structure, and no word on what happens to cloud-hosted files after a downgrade or cancelled contract. Your data stays in your hands if you self-host, but a developer cannot see a format to read it from. 6 10 11
The Brand Marketer
The self-hosting route is unusually well documented: a Data Center Edition delivered as an OCI-compliant bundle with container images, runnable air-gapped on the customer's own Kubernetes infrastructure, plus a dedicated German server option. We found no public information on export formats preserving vectors, text or structure, on a documented file format, on bulk export of a team's boards, or on what happens to files after a downgrade or cancelled contract, so portability beyond hosting it yourself is not evidenced. 6 10 11
The Agency Owner
The Data Center Edition is a genuine way out: your own infrastructure, an OCI-compliant deployment bundle with Kubernetes and helm charts, even fully air-gapped operation — the strongest control story I have seen short of open formats. But we found no public information on export formats, layered or whole-file export, or what happens to boards after a cancelled contract; the only termination figure is a three-year deletion period for email data, and the terms grant the vendor a non-exclusive, sublicensable licence to customer content while we found no statement of customer file ownership. 3 5 10 11
The Data Protection Officer
The self-hosting story is unusually strong: a Data Center Edition delivered as an OCI-compliant bundle with container images and an operations manual, runnable fully air-gapped on the customer's own infrastructure with customer-controlled update timing. We found no public information on export formats that keep layers or components, a documented file format, or what happens to files after a downgrade or cancelled contract; the terms instead grant the vendor a broad, sub-licensable licence to user content for providing the service. 5 10 11
The Skeptic
Self-hosting is unusually well evidenced — a Data Center Edition that runs fully air-gapped on the customer's own Kubernetes infrastructure, delivered as an OCI-compliant deployment bundle with customer-controlled update timing — yet we found no public information on export formats, a documented file format, or what happens to boards after a downgrade or cancellation. The terms grant the vendor a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sub-licensable license to user content for the purpose of providing the service; we found no statement of customer ownership or export rights. 3 5 10 11
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
I found no public information on AI features anywhere in the captured pages — no generative tools, no named models or providers, no statement on training with customer content and no terms on commercial use of generated output. The only content-rights statement I can find is the broad non-exclusive, worldwide, sub-licensable service licence the user grants to the vendor. 5 1
The Frontend Engineer
The captured pages contain no AI story at all: no generative features, no named models, no statement on training with customer content, and no terms on commercial use of generated output — I found no public information on any of it. The terms of use do grant the vendor a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sub-licensable licence to user content for providing the service, which is about operating the platform, not AI governance. 3 5
The Brand Marketer
We found no public information on AI features of any kind, on named models or providers, on whether customer content is used for training, on commercial rights to generated output, or on indemnity — so I have no basis for an answer on whether a generated image may go on a trade-fair stand. The terms do have users grant the vendor a licence to their content for the purpose of providing the service, which speaks to hosting, not to AI. 5
The Agency Owner
We found no public information on AI features, the models behind them, training on customer content, or rights to generated output — nothing in the terms or feature pages touches it. There is nothing here to govern, and nothing an agency could point a client to on indemnity or commercial use of generated material. 5
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public information on AI features, named models or providers, any statement on training on customer files, or rights to generated output. The only content-rights language is the licence users grant the vendor over their own content in the terms — protection flowing the wrong way for my purposes. 3 5
The Skeptic
We found no public information on AI features of any kind — no generative tools, no named models or providers, no statement on training on customer content, no output rights and no indemnity. The only content-rights statement in the captured pages is the service-provision license quoted above, which is not AI-specific. 5
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
German hosting is documented with named regions — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus dedicated servers, a self-hosted edition with full data sovereignty and air-gapped operation, and the privacy policy names the web-conferencing (Tokbox/Vonage) and analytics (Matomo) third parties. There is no published subprocessor list with locations and purposes and the contracting entity is not confirmed on the captured pages, which keeps this below the top band. 2 3 10 11
The Frontend Engineer
Hosting in Germany is stated throughout, with named German infrastructure options — AWS Germany included, IONOS or StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus dedicated servers, a self-hosted Data Center Edition marketed as full data sovereignty with no dependence on external service providers, and availability through the German Administrative Cloud. Weighing against a higher score: the vendor's own captured pages do not confirm the contracting entity, and I found no published subprocessor list or DPA; the privacy policy names a third-party web conferencing provider (Tokbox/Vonage) for video streaming, which can be centrally deactivated. 1 2 3 10
The Brand Marketer
The captured pages state hosting in Germany on named infrastructure — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus a dedicated German server option and a self-hosted, air-gapped Data Center Edition, and the vendor presents itself as a German company. We found no public information on a published subprocessor list with locations and purposes, a data processing agreement, or certifications, and the privacy policy names individual third parties such as Google Ireland for sign-on, Tokbox (Vonage) for conferencing and Matomo for statistics rather than a complete list. 2 3 10
The Agency Owner
Hosted in Germany on named infrastructure — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus a self-hosted, air-gapped Data Center Edition, which is real European control a German client can lean on. The gaps: we found no published subprocessor list or DPA, and the web conferencing module involves a third party, Tokbox of Vonage, with no stated processing location, though it can be centrally deactivated; the German single sign-on provider named is Google Ireland. 2 3 10
The Data Protection Officer
The pages state hosting in Germany on named German infrastructure — AWS by default, with IONOS and StackIT as options — in certified German data centres, plus a self-hosted, air-gapped edition and availability through the German Administrative Cloud. I found no published subprocessor list with locations and purposes: third parties such as Google Ireland Limited, Vonage (Tokbox) and Matomo appear only inside the privacy policy, the collected sovereignty attributes could not confirm the contracting entity's jurisdiction from the captured pages, and we found no public information on a data processing agreement. 1 2 3 10
The Skeptic
German hosting is stated on named infrastructure — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — in certified data centers in Germany, with a genuine self-hosting edition including an air-gapped mode and availability via the German Administrative Cloud. However, the independently sourced attributes mark the contracting entity, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure as unconfirmed on the captured pages, and the privacy policy names only Google Ireland for sign-on, Tokbox (Vonage) for conferencing and Matomo for anonymized statistics rather than a published subprocessor list with locations and purposes. 2 3 10
Pricing transparency
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
The pricing page publishes a real plan matrix — active boards, objects per board, storage and per-upload file size by plan, single sign-on as an additional fee, payment by card or invoice, NGO and education discounts — but I found no public information on per-seat figures for each plan, guest or viewer billing, how added seats are billed, or the plan where admin controls begin. Enterprise is described only as customised solutions. 2 1
The Frontend Engineer
The pricing page publishes a plan matrix — a free plan with 3 active boards, 100 objects per board and 250 MB storage, rising through tiers by storage and upload size — but no price figure appears anywhere in the captured information, so I found no public information on per-seat prices. Single Sign-On is listed only as an additional fee with no amount, IONOS or StackIT German hosting carries an unspecified additional fee, and enterprise clients get customized solutions; nothing shows how guests or reviewers are billed, so a buyer cannot compute an annual cost. 2
The Brand Marketer
The pricing page lays out a free plan and paid tiers by limits — active boards, objects per board, storage from 250 MB to unlimited, and upload sizes — together with a free trial, payment by credit card or invoice, and a note that single sign-on carries an additional fee on some plans. We found no public information on per-seat prices, on how guests or reviewers are billed, or on the cost of the single sign-on add-on, so I cannot compute the annual cost for a dozen offices from these pages. 2
The Agency Owner
The pricing page shows plan limits — three active boards and 100 objects on the free plan, storage from 250 MB to unlimited, file uploads capped at 10 to 100 MB — and lists single sign-on as an additional fee with credit card or invoice payment. We found no public information on any per-seat price figure, on seat types, or on how guests and reviewers are billed, so I cannot compute an annual cost for a client team from these pages. 2
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing page compares plans by active boards, objects per board, storage and upload limits and states a free plan with three boards plus payment by card or invoice, but the captured pages contain no per-seat price figures. We found no public information on seat types, how guests and reviewers are billed, or the price of the single sign-on add-on beyond "additional fee", so an annual team cost is not computable from what is public. 2
The Skeptic
The captured pricing page documents a free plan of three active boards with one hundred objects per board and 250 megabytes of storage, tiered storage and file upload limits above it, payment by credit card or invoice, Single Sign-On as an additional fee on some plans, customized enterprise solutions, and special conditions for NGOs and educational institutions. We found no public information on per-seat prices, which seat types exist, how guests and reviewers are billed, or how and when added seats are charged, so an annual team cost cannot be computed from the captures. 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 | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Conceptboard
Is Conceptboard European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Conceptboard as EU-Made.
Where does Conceptboard store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Conceptboard have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Conceptboard?
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: Conceptboard alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 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.
- 21 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
- 4 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
- 3 data 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 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 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 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
- 2 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
- 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 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 conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Brand assets & governance — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Brand assets & governance — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap conceptboard.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →