whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Document Management (DMS)

Doxis

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

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

by Doxis GmbH · www.doxis.com

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

Link to this page

Doxis: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Doxis: 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.

Doxis at a glance

Vendor
Doxis 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 Doxis 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Doxis is an enterprise document management platform from Doxis GmbH of Bonn — strongest at document intake, weakest at sovereignty. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources

Doxis alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Records Manager

Weighted verdict

Owns the filing plan and gets the call when a contract from 2019 cannot be found. Wants metadata that is set at capture rather than typed later, version history with restore, search that respects permissions, and a bulk export that keeps metadata and versions together.

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

Scored by The Records Manager

Panel median The Records Manager 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 Records Manager
Capture, OCR & indexing 4 of 5 4 of 5
Versioning, permissions & audit trail 2 of 5 2 of 5
Audit-proof archiving & retention 3 of 5 3 of 5
Document workflows & integrations 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Search, retrieval & exit 3 of 5 3 of 5
European sovereignty 1.5 of 5 1 of 5

Capture, OCR & indexing

How this is scored

How documents get in and become findable: scanning and email intake, OCR, classification and metadata extraction, and whether incoming e-invoices (XRechnung, ZUGFeRD) are read as structured data rather than as pictures.

0 — Manual upload only; no OCR, no metadata beyond file name and folder.

3 — Upload, drag-and-drop and scan import with OCR mentioned, but indexing is manual and no word on email intake or e-invoice formats.

5 — Scanner, email and folder intake, full-text OCR, document types with metadata fields, and automatic extraction of common fields (date, sender, amount) documented.

8 — AI- or rule-based classification and field extraction with confidence and a validation step, XRechnung and ZUGFeRD read as structured data, mailbox and Microsoft 365 intake, and duplicate detection documented.

10 — Capture is engineered and shown: classification and extraction trainable per document type, validation queues, e-invoice validation against the standard, intake channels listed with their limits, and where AI processing runs (location, model provider) stated.

Report an error

The Records Manager

Capture is well evidenced: documents arrive via web upload, email, mobile capture, API, SFTP or batch import; machine learning sorts 50-plus document types with training of your own; extraction of 150-plus fields runs with configurable confidence levels, human review on uncertain cases, and validation that flags duplicates before anything reaches downstream processes; and ZUGFeRD, XRechnung and Peppol UBL e-invoice formats are supported. What keeps it short of the top: we found no public information on the limits of each intake channel or on where the AI processing actually runs. 4 5 8

Report an error

Versioning, permissions & audit trail

How this is scored

Who may see and change which document, what happened to it, and whether earlier states can be recovered: version history, check-in and check-out, role- and attribute-based rights, and an audit trail of reads and changes.

0 — Files overwrite each other; rights only at folder level or not described; no log of who did what.

3 — Version history and folder permissions exist, but no check-out, no record-level rights and no documented audit log.

5 — Version history with restore, check-in and check-out, roles and groups with document-type or record-level rights, and an audit log of changes documented.

8 — Metadata-driven permissions (by department, client or confidentiality), audit trail covering reads, exports and deletions, single sign-on and directory sync (Entra ID, LDAP) documented, and administrators' own actions logged.

10 — Access is provable: the audit trail is tamper-evident and exportable, permission changes are themselves versioned, field-level rights and need-to-know access for HR or legal records documented, and the log retention period stated.

Report an error

The Records Manager

Role-based access and audit trails are named among the governance controls, every search is said to respect the access permissions defined in the system, and versioning is mentioned when transferring file directories into the repository. We found no public information on version restore, check-in and check-out, single sign-on or directory sync, metadata-driven permissions, or on what the audit trail records and how long it is kept — the recoverability question a records manager asks first is unanswered on these pages. 5 10 11

Report an error

Audit-proof archiving & retention

How this is scored

GoBD-compliant, revisionssicher archiving: immutability of archived documents, retention schedules and deletion, tax-audit data access, and the independent evidence behind the claim — scored on what is certified and documented, not on the word "GoBD-konform".

0 — No statement on archiving, retention or GoBD.

3 — "GoBD-konform" or "revisionssicher" claimed with no certificate, no description of how immutability is achieved and no retention settings documented.

5 — Archived documents documented as unchangeable, retention periods configurable per document type, deletion after expiry, and a sample Verfahrensdokumentation or GoBD guidance offered.

8 — An auditor's report (IDW PS 880 or comparable) published or named with its scope and date, WORM or equivalent storage described, legal hold, GDPR deletion reconciled with retention duties, and Z1–Z3 tax-audit export documented.

10 — Archiving is evidenced end to end: current Testat with scope covering the cloud and on-premises editions as sold, retention and deletion logged and reportable, long-term formats (PDF/A) enforced, and a documented procedure for the tax audit and for moving the archive without breaking its integrity.

Report an error

The Records Manager

Certification pages for GoBD and for IDW PS 880 are published, and the latter states that the certification demonstrates to auditors of annual financial statements that the IT system is suited to the purpose; automated archiving by your own rules, proof of compliance with retention periods, and deletion that respects statutory retention duties are all described. The captured pages give neither the auditor's report with its scope and date nor any description of WORM storage, legal hold or a Z1-to-Z3 tax-audit export, so the promise of completely audit-proof archiving rests on the certificates being named rather than shown in substance. 2 6 7 9

Report an error

Document workflows & integrations

How this is scored

What happens to a document after it arrives: approval and invoice workflows, tasks and deadlines, and the connectors that tie the DMS to ERP, accounting, DATEV, Microsoft 365 and the rest of the stack.

0 — No workflows; documents are stored and nothing else.

3 — A fixed approval or sharing step and a handful of named integrations, with no workflow designer and no API documentation.

5 — A workflow designer for approvals and invoice processing, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, Microsoft 365 or Outlook integration, and a documented REST API.

8 — Graphical workflow modelling without code, invoice workflow with ERP or DATEV handover documented, connectors for named ERP systems (SAP, Microsoft Dynamics, DATEV) with their scope, webhooks or events, and e-signature integration.

10 — Workflows are a platform: versioned workflow definitions, process reporting with throughput times, a public API reference with rate limits and a sandbox, a partner marketplace of integrations with stated maintainers, and workflow history kept in the audit trail.

Report an error

The Records Manager

The purchase-to-pay chain is documented end to end in SAP — rule-based requisition approvals, automatic purchase orders from approved requests, invoice capture through to posting over certified ArchiveLink, CMIS and RFC interfaces with no middleware — alongside more than 200 named integrations including Salesforce and Microsoft 365, no-programming event-condition-action automation, and a library of pre-configured, easily modified workflow apps. An API is referenced for AI agents, but we found no public information on a documented API reference with limits, webhooks, e-signature or DATEV handover, which caps this below the top band. 4 5 8 9 10

Report an error

Search, retrieval & exit

How this is scored

Finding documents again and taking them with you: full-text and metadata search, saved searches and mobile access, and whether documents, metadata, versions and audit trail can be exported in documented formats when the contract ends.

0 — Folder browsing only; no export beyond downloading single files.

3 — Full-text search exists, but no metadata filters, and bulk export is undocumented or only on request.

5 — Full-text and metadata search with filters and saved searches, mobile or web access, and bulk export of documents with their metadata (for example CSV or XML) documented.

8 — Search across versions and attachments with permissions respected, export of documents in original format with metadata, versions and audit trail in a documented structure, and an import path from other DMS or file shares named.

10 — The exit is designed in: a documented complete export with schema, export available self-service at any time, the post-termination retrieval window and data deletion stated, and archives stored in open formats so a successor system can take them over intact.

Report an error

The Records Manager

Search is strong: keyword, full-text and combined modes with filters by author, language, document type and processor, dynamic result lists, natural-language AI search with source-linked answers, and permissions enforced on every query; an import path from file directories and SharePoint is also named. On the exit side only classified data exports to JSON, XML, CSV or PDF are documented — we found no public information on exporting documents together with their versions and audit trail, on saved searches, or on the post-termination retrieval window, which is the part I care about most when a contract ends. 5 10 11

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and its owner are, where documents and their metadata are stored and processed in the cloud edition, and who the subprocessors are — including any AI provider that reads document content. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.

0 — Non-EU contracting entity, no statement on where documents are stored, and subprocessors unnamed.

3 — An EU entity contracts, but the cloud edition runs on a non-EU-controlled hyperscaler without a stated safeguard, or the subprocessor list is absent.

5 — EU contracting entity and EU data centres stated for the cloud edition, with a DPA, but significant parts of the chain (hosting, AI processing, support) are non-EU-controlled without a stated safeguard.

8 — EU entity, documents and metadata stored in named EU data centres, subprocessor list with locations published, AI processing location disclosed, an on-premises or private-cloud option offered, and certifications (ISO 27001, BSI C5) published.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity, every processing location and subprocessor European, customer-controlled keys or on-premises operation available, and certifications with their scope published.

Report an error

The Records Manager

The vendor information points to a German operating company in Bonn, but every sovereignty attribute — contracting entity, ownership behind the private-equity-held house, data residency, subprocessors — is recorded as unknown, and the privacy policy capture says nothing about where documents are stored. We found no public information on the cloud edition's data centres, on any subprocessor list, or on which provider's AI reads the document content; an on-premises option and certifications such as ISO 27001 or BSI C5 also do not appear in the captures. 2 3

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the cost of a given number of users, storage and modules — including cloud versus on-premises licensing, maintenance, implementation partner fees and price increases — from public pages alone.

0 — No public prices at all; every quote comes from sales or a partner.

3 — A "from" price or a single edition priced, but modules, storage, maintenance and partner implementation are unstated — the real cost is unknowable.

5 — Editions priced per user or per month, but at least one commonly needed cost (storage, archiving or workflow module, maintenance percentage, onboarding) is missing or "on request".

8 — Every edition and module priced publicly, storage limits and overage stated, on-premises licence and maintenance terms given, and contract term and notice period published.

10 — Complete cost computability: a configurator or price list covering users, modules, storage and deployment model, partner implementation priced or bounded, and price-increase terms on a public page.

Report an error

The Records Manager

No prices appear anywhere in the captures — not per user, per edition, for storage, modules or maintenance — and the only cost statements are that a demo is quick, easy and free and that the newsletter is free. A buyer cannot compute the cost of any deployment from public pages alone; everything runs through a demo conversation. 9 10

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

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

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about Doxis

Is Doxis European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Doxis as EU-Made.

Where does Doxis store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

Does Doxis have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Doxis?

As of 15 Oct 2026, the panel rates AMAGNO (3/5), EASY Archive (2.5/5) and enaio (2.5/5) highest among the other 14 Document Management (DMS) 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 AMAGNO (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Doxis 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 Doxis? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (11)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Privacy policy www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Legal notice www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Search, retrieval & exit — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Search, retrieval & exit — found from sitemap www.doxis.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →