whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Design

ProtoPie

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 6 dimensions proven

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by ProtoPie Inc. · www.protopie.io

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

ProtoPie: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai ProtoPie: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

ProtoPie at a glance

Vendor
ProtoPie Inc.
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Data hosting
Outside the EU by default source, captured 3 Nov 2026
Free plan
Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 3 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates ProtoPie 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. ProtoPie, from Studio XID, is an interaction prototyping tool. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 4 Nov 2026. all sources

ProtoPie alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Frontend Engineer

Weighted verdict

Turns the designs into code and gets the ticket when they disagree. Wants an inspect mode without a paid seat, tokens exported in a documented format, components mapped to the code ones, and an API that reads the whole file rather than a screenshot of it.

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

Scored by The Frontend Engineer

Panel median The Frontend Engineer This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Frontend Engineer
Design, prototyping & design systems 3 of 5 3 of 5
Collaboration, review & developer handoff 2 of 5 2 of 5
Files, formats & portability 2 of 5 2.5 of 5
AI features & rights to the work 3 of 5 2.5 of 5
European sovereignty 0.5 of 5 0.5 of 5

Design, prototyping & design systems

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 — Not a design tool: a file viewer, a stock library or a single-purpose converter in which nothing is laid out or drawn.

3 — A canvas or editor with templates, shapes, text and images; reusable components, shared styles and prototyping are basic or not described.

5 — Reusable components or styles shared across files, responsive or auto layout, and clickable prototypes or presentations linking screens.

8 — A design system managed in the tool: team libraries that update where they are used, variables or tokens for colour, type and spacing with modes or themes, component variants and properties, prototypes with transitions and conditional logic, and library changes published 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

Components are a real system here: main-component editing, instances that update from it, overrides that persist through edits, slash grouping, swappable instances, overridable variable initial values and full variant support on import, plus Auto Layout on containers, components and multi-object selections — and prototypes run on logic, variables and formulas rather than plain click-through. The library the docs mention is a local one, and I found no public information on team libraries that publish with versions or on colour, type and spacing tokens with themes, so the design-system layer stops short of governed. 1 2 3 6

Report an error

Collaboration, review & developer handoff

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 — A single-user tool: files are worked on alone and passed on as exports.

3 — Files shared by link with comments or real-time co-editing; guest access, permissions and a developer view are basic or not described.

5 — Real-time co-editing, comments with mentions, sharing with view or edit rights per file or project, and an inspect or developer view with measurements and asset export.

8 — Guests and reviewers who comment without a paid seat, version history with restore, branching or review of changes before they reach the main file, a developer mode that links components to code, a documented API and plugins, 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

Sharing controls are concrete — per-prototype choice of who can view and download, password protection, restriction to team space, and Enterprise link expiry from one day to one week — and handoff is a first-class feature: interaction recordings pair with the prototype so engineers get the interaction specifications. But I found no public information on comments, co-editing, version history or an inspect view with measurements, nothing on whether guests can review without a paid seat, and integrations appear only as a named MCP capability rather than a documented API. 1 4 5 7

Report an error

Brand assets & governance

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 assets of any kind; the product has no library, kit or template that a team uses together.

3 — A shared folder, brand kit or template set with logos, colours and fonts; locking, guidelines and asset metadata are basic or not described.

5 — A central brand kit or library with logos, colours and fonts, team templates that non-designers can fill, and the ability to lock brand elements or restrict who edits templates.

8 — Brand guidelines published in the tool, tagging and search across assets, approval workflows for new assets and template output, version control on assets, rights, usage and expiry metadata with warnings on expiry, 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer not rated — no public information

We found no public information on brand asset governance: the captured pages show no brand kit, central asset library, team templates or licence and expiry metadata, and the public gallery of community prototypes is a showcase rather than a library a company runs its brand through. The sharing and component pages I read bear on prototypes and reuse, not on brand management. 1 5

Report an error

Files, formats & portability

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 — Work cannot leave the product: no export or download of designs is offered.

3 — Export of designs as images or PDF per page or frame; export of whole files with structure and access after cancellation are basic or not described.

5 — Export to PNG, PDF and SVG with vectors and text kept, whole files downloadable to a local copy, and files of a downgraded or cancelled account addressed in the help centre or terms.

8 — An open or publicly documented file format, import from and export to other named tools documented, bulk export of a team’s files, an API that reads full file structure, files of removed users transferred to the organisation by policy, and a stated retention and 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

The Figma import pipeline is documented at a depth I can build against: plugin and legacy paths, vector and text layers kept as SVG, constraints and core Auto Layout carried over, components with variants through Component Mode into a local library, and reimport that updates layers while preserving my ProtoPie edits. Outbound there is a share setting controlling who may download the prototype and an Enterprise On-premise plan named in the terms, but I found no documented export format out of the tool, no API that reads full file structure, and nothing on what happens to files after a downgrade, a removed seat or a cancelled contract. 5 6 7 8

Report an error

AI features & rights to the work

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 — The terms state that customer files train the vendor’s models with no opt-out, or that generated output may not be used commercially.

3 — AI features described on an AI or help page with a general statement on responsible use or data handling; training on customer files, admin controls and output rights are basic or not described.

5 — A statement on whether customer content trains the models (excluded, or with a documented opt-out), AI features that an admin can switch off for the organisation, and commercial use of generated output addressed in the terms or AI page.

8 — Training excluded by default for business plans, model providers and 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

The AI terms are unusually specific: Anthropic PBC and OpenAI in the United States with a 30-day provider retention, processing stated to run through Anthropic PBC in the United States, 90-day retention on ProtoPie's side, outputs that I own with rights retained in my inputs, and an organization-level on/off switch for Enterprise admins. Against that, on Basic and Pro the terms say ProtoPie AI "may use the Inputs you submit or make available to improve our Services" with no opt-out documented for that use, everything is provided as-is with all faults, and no indemnity for generated output appears. 1 8

Report an error

European sovereignty

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 — Proven non-EU on every dimension the evidence covers: non-EU contracting entity and non-EU hosting, with no EU option stated.

3 — One European element proven: an EU contracting entity or EU representative, EU data residency (even if only on an enterprise plan), or a published DPA, with the rest of the chain unstated.

5 — EU hosting stated for files as standard or selectable and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, with a DPA offered; the subprocessor chain (AI, rendering, support) is unstated or partly non-EU.

8 — EU contracting entity, files, assets and backups stored in the EU on named infrastructure, subprocessor list published with locations and purposes, and the processing location of AI features 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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

Nothing captured places any part of the chain in Europe: the contracting entity's jurisdiction, where prototypes are hosted, a DPA and certifications are all unstated in the material I read. The one dimension the terms do pin down is AI processing, which runs through Anthropic PBC in the United States with data residency selections listed among unsupported features, so no European element is proven anywhere. 1 8

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

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 public "from" price or one priced plan, per seat or flat.

5 — Per-seat prices public for the main plans with the billing period stated and the main features per plan listed.

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, the plan that unlocks SSO and admin controls named, and VAT treatment stated.

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.

Report an error

The Frontend Engineer

The plan ladder is public by name — Free, Perpetual, Individual, Basic, Pro (Plus), Enterprise, Enterprise On-premise — with team membership tied to Pro and Enterprise, AI excluded from four plans, and credit pooling and reset by billing anniversary spelled out. But I found no price figure on any page captured, so an annual cost for a given mix of editors and viewers can't be computed from this material. 1 4 5 8

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 of 6 dimensions proven

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

Hosting location Outside the EU ⚠ unverified 0/4 pts 8 Report an error
Hosting options Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Open source Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data processing agreement Not determined — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about ProtoPie

Is ProtoPie European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where ProtoPie is based.

Where does ProtoPie store data?

ProtoPie stores customer data outside the EU by default, per the vendor’s page captured 3 Nov 2026.

Does ProtoPie have a free plan?

Yes. ProtoPie has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 3 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to ProtoPie?

As of 4 Nov 2026, the panel rates Penpot (3.5/5), Sketch (3/5) and Collaboard (3/5) highest among the other 21 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: ProtoPie alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

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

Sources (8)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Design, prototyping & design systems — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Design, prototyping & design systems — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Collaboration, review & developer handoff — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Files, formats & portability — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 AI features & rights to the work — found from sitemap www.protopie.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →