Document Management (DMS)
ecoDMS
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by ecoDMS GmbH · www.ecodms.de
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.
ecoDMS at a glance
- Vendor
- ecoDMS 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 ecoDMS 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. ecoDMS is a locally installed document management system from ecoDMS GmbH in Aachen, Germany, delivered by download onto the buyer's own Windows, Linux, macOS or NAS hardware. 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
ecoDMS is a locally installed document management system from ecoDMS GmbH in Aachen, Germany, delivered by download onto the buyer's own Windows, Linux, macOS or NAS hardware. Capture and indexing is its strongest area, with scores at 6: scanners via TWAIN, WIA and SANE, a network scan folder with separator sheets, email and drag-and-drop intake, automatic OCR full-text indexing, and OCR that reads invoice data. Sovereignty is its weakest, at 2-4: local installation keeps documents on infrastructure the buyer controls, but we found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, data residency or subprocessors, nor where the ScanApp's AI processing runs. The judges genuinely split on document workflows, 4-6: the higher scores credit the WORKZ add-on and a documented JSON-REST API with Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100, while the lower scores note those connections appear as webinar topics without stated scope and workflows sit behind a separately licensed add-on. Pricing transparency scores sit at 4-5 on a published from-price of "ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt."
Speaks for it
- Capture and indexing scores sit at 6, covering scanner capture via TWAIN, WIA and SANE, a network scan folder with separator-sheet batch splitting, email and drag-and-drop intake, and automatic OCR full-text indexing
- A published from-price of "ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt." for a perpetual, transferable licence with updates included for 24 or 48 months lets buyers budget the licence before any partner visit
- The GoBD archiving claim comes with a described mechanism — scanned documents stored unchangeable, versioned and in PDF/A — rather than the label alone
- Download-only delivery and installation on the buyer's own computer or NAS keep documents on infrastructure the buyer controls
- A JSON-REST API compatible with PHP, Java and QT, with named connections to Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100, gives workflows integration substance
Held against it
- Sovereignty scores fall to 2-4, with no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, data residency or a single subprocessor
- Classification stays manual or semi-automatic via templates, with no public information on duplicate detection, validation with confidence values, or XRechnung and ZUGFeRD read as structured data
- Versioning and permissions scores sit at 3-4, with no public information on check-in and check-out, record-level rights, single sign-on with directory sync, or an audit log of reads and exports
- No auditor's report is named behind the GoBD claim, and we found no public information on retention periods per document type, deletion after expiry, or a sample Verfahrensdokumentation
- No prices are public for the WORKZ add-on, ecoMAILZ, the all-inclusive bundle or update renewals, so the total cost of a given setup is not computable
Best for
- You are a small or mid-sized firm that wants scanning, OCR indexing and revisionssicher archiving on your own server or NAS at a published from-price
- You capture documents across scanners, a network scan folder, email and a smartphone app and want them funnelled into one full-text-searchable archive
- You want to connect ERP or accounting systems such as Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine or Sage 100 via a JSON-REST API
- Your team runs its own infrastructure and values the archive physically sitting on customer hardware rather than in a vendor cloud
Avoid if
- You manage personnel files or other sensitive records and need record-level rights and an audit log of reads and exports — the Data Protection Officer finds that silence decisive, and we found no public information on either
- Your tax or GDPR regime requires a sample Verfahrensdokumentation, retention periods configurable per document type, or a named auditor's report behind the GoBD claim
- You must plan a documented bulk export of documents with their metadata, versions and audit trail as an exit path — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your procurement requires publicly verifiable sovereignty — we found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, data residency or a single subprocessor
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Capture, OCR & indexing | 3 of 5 |
| Versioning, permissions & audit trail | 1.5 of 5 |
| Audit-proof archiving & retention | 2 of 5 |
| Document workflows & integrations | 2.5 of 5 |
| Search, retrieval & exit | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 2 of 5 |
Capture, OCR & indexing
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
Intake is genuinely documented: scanner via TWAIN/WIA/SANE or network folder with separator-sheet batch splitting, email and drag-and-drop, and a mobile ScanApp whose AI crops the photo into the inbox, with OCR full-text indexing and automatic invoice-data extraction from the Scaninput folder. Classification, however, is described only as manual or semi-automatic via templates, and we found no public information on XRechnung or ZUGFeRD read as structured data, on duplicate detection, on a validation queue, or on where the AI cropping runs. 1 7 8 14
The Records Manager
Intake is well covered — scanners via TWAIN/WIA/SANE and a Scaninput folder with automatic background import, drag-and-drop, e-mail as an input type, and a mobile scan app whose AI crops the photo — with automatic OCR full-text indexing and OCR extraction of invoice data. Classification, though, is manual or semi-automatic via templates, and I found no public information on XRechnung or ZUGFeRD being read as structured data, validation steps with confidence, or duplicate detection. 1 7 8 14
The IT Integrator
Scanner integration is properly worked out — TWAIN/WIA/SANE and Scan-to-Folder with background batch import, separator sheets that split paper stacks automatically, and OCR that full-text indexes every document. Recognition by layout or keyword plus OCR extraction of invoice data, classified manually or via templates, edges toward rule-based capture, but we found no public information on a validation step with confidence values, duplicate detection, reading XRechnung and ZUGFeRD as structured data, or where the ScanApp's cropping AI runs. 1 7 8 14
The Mittelstand Owner
Scanner capture via TWAIN, WIA and SANE, a network scan folder with separator sheets, email and drag-and-drop intake, automatic OCR full-text indexing and invoice data read out of scans — capture is solidly covered. Classification stays manual or semi-automatic via templates, and I found no public information on XRechnung or ZUGFeRD being read as structured data, on a validation step with confidence values, or on duplicate detection. 1 7 8 14
The Data Protection Officer
Intake is well documented — scanning via TWAIN, WIA or SANE and a network scan folder, email and office files by drag-and-drop or automatic import, and a smartphone ScanApp whose AI crops the image — with automatic OCR full-text indexing and recognition of documents by layout or keyword that reads invoice data on its own. Classification stays manual or semi-automatic via templates, and I found no public information on reading XRechnung or ZUGFeRD as structured data, on a validation step with confidence values, or on where the ScanApp's AI actually processes the image. 1 7 8 14
The Skeptic
Scanning is genuinely covered — TWAIN/WIA/SANE and Scan-to-Folder intake, separator sheets that split paper stacks automatically, background OCR full-text indexing, and OCR that reads invoice data — with email, Office files and images named as input types. But classification is manual or template-based, and we found no public information on validation queues or confidence values, duplicate detection, or XRechnung and ZUGFeRD being read as structured data; the only AI documented anywhere crops smartphone photos. 1 7 8 14
Versioning, permissions & audit trail
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
A change history, versioned storage and the statement that access is clearly controllable and changes remain traceable are on the record, and team rights are named for the email product. Beyond that we found no public information on check-in and check-out, restore of earlier states, role- or record-level rights, or an audit log covering reads, exports and deletions — let alone tamper-evidence or a log retention period. 1 8 9
The Records Manager
A traceable change history, versioned storage and controllable access are stated, which is the minimum I need before trusting an archive. But I found no public information on restoring earlier versions, check-in and check-out, record-level rights, or an audit log covering reads, exports and deletions. 1 8 9
The IT Integrator
A traceable change history, immutable versioned storage and controlled access are claimed, plus team rights for the email archive, but these are one-line statements without detail. We found no public information on check-in and check-out, record- or metadata-level rights, an audit log covering reads and exports, or single sign-on and directory sync — exactly what I check before wiring a DMS into Microsoft 365. 1 8 9
The Mittelstand Owner
Versioned, immutable storage and a traceable change history are documented, and access is said to be clearly controllable. I found no public information on check-in and check-out, rights per document type or record, an audit log of reads and exports, or single sign-on with directory sync. 1 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
A traceable change history and versioned, unchangeable storage of scans are stated, and access control is described in general terms, with team rights shown only for the separate email archive. I found no public information on check-in and check-out, record- or field-level rights, an audit log of reads and exports, single sign-on or directory sync, or how long any log is kept — for personnel files in one place, that silence decides it. 1 8 9
The Skeptic
Version history and access control are stated as headline features — changes remain nachvollziehbar, archived documents stored versioned and unchangeable in PDF/A — and team rights exist for the email archive. We found no public information on check-in and check-out, record- or field-level permissions, single sign-on or directory sync, or any documented audit log of reads, exports and deletions, so the traceability claim stays a claim. 1 8 9
Audit-proof archiving & retention
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
More than a homepage slogan: the pages describe scanned documents stored immutable, versioned and in PDF/A, which is at least a mechanism for immutability, and retrieval for short-notice audits is addressed. But no auditor's report such as IDW PS 880 with scope and date is named anywhere, and we found no public information on retention periods configurable per document type, deletion after expiry, legal hold, a sample Verfahrensdokumentation, or a Z1–Z3 export for the tax office. 1 8 9 10
The Records Manager
Revisionssichere, GoBD-conform archiving is claimed and the mechanism is at least described: scanned documents are stored unchangeable, versioned and in PDF/A. No auditor's certificate is named, and I found no public information on configurable retention periods per document type, deletion after expiry, a sample Verfahrensdokumentation, or a tax-audit export. 1 8 9
The IT Integrator
The vendor claims revisionssichere, GoBD-compliant archiving and gives a real mechanism — scanned documents stored unchangeably, versioned, in PDF/A — rather than the label alone. Beyond that we found no public information on retention periods configurable per document type, deletion after expiry, a sample Verfahrensdokumentation, an auditor's report, or a documented tax-audit export. 1 8 9
The Mittelstand Owner
Revisionssicher archiving per GoBD is claimed and the mechanism is described: scanned documents are stored unchangeable, versioned and in PDF/A. No auditor's report or certificate is named, and I found no public information on configurable retention periods per document type, deletion after expiry, or a sample Verfahrensdokumentation. 1 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
The pages do describe how immutability is achieved — scanned documents are stored unchangeable, versioned and in PDF/A — which is more than a bare GoBD claim. But I found no public information on retention periods per document type, deletion after expiry, a sample Verfahrensdokumentation, an auditor's report, tax-audit data export, or how GDPR deletion is reconciled with a promise that archived documents never change. 8 9 10
The Skeptic
"Revisionssicher nach GoBD" comes with an actual mechanism — scanned documents stored unchangeable, versioned and in PDF/A — which is more than the bare word on most homepages. Still, we found no public information on configurable retention periods, deletion after expiry, a Verfahrensdokumentation, legal hold, Z1–Z3 tax-audit export, or any auditor's report or Testat standing behind the claim. 1 8 9 10
Document workflows & integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
Approval and acknowledgement workflows exist, but they come only through the separately sold WORKZ add-on, and a JSON-REST API documented with PHP, Java and QT plus connectors to Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100 give it real integration substance. We found no public information on a graphical workflow designer, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, webhooks or e-signature, and the DATEV connection is advertised through a webinar without its scope written down. 1 2 11 12
The Records Manager
The WORKZ add-on brings automated acknowledgement and approval workflows, and a JSON-REST API with connectors to Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100 is documented. I found no public information on graphical workflow modelling, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, webhooks or e-signature, so workflows stop short of being a platform. 1 2 11 12
The IT Integrator
There is a JSON-REST API explicitly meant for ERP, accounting and custom applications, an add-on with acknowledgement and approval workflows, and four named targets — Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine, Sage 100 — but those connections appear as webinar topics rather than connectors with a stated scope. We found no public information on webhooks or events, a graphical workflow designer, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, or e-signature, and the API is described by protocol and compatible languages rather than a documented reference. 1 2 11 12
The Mittelstand Owner
Approval and acknowledgement workflows exist as a paid add-on, a JSON-REST API is documented, and connections to Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100 are named. I found no public information on a graphical workflow designer, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, or the scope of those ERP connectors, so I cannot tell whether my invoice approval runs without a consultant. 1 2 11 12
The Data Protection Officer
The WORKZ add-on brings automated acknowledgement and approval workflows, a JSON-REST API is documented for connecting ERP and accounting systems, and Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100 are named as connections. I found no public information on a graphical workflow designer, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, Microsoft 365 or Outlook integration, webhooks, or e-signature. 1 2 11 12
The Skeptic
The WORKZ add-on promises automated acknowledgement and approval workflows plus a document stamp, a JSON-REST API is described with compatible languages for ERP and accounting connections, and Lexware, DATEV Unternehmen Online, SelectLine and Sage 100 are named in a live webinar. We found no public information on a graphical workflow designer, tasks with deadlines and substitutes, connector scopes, webhooks or e-signature — and the workflows sit behind a separately licensed add-on rather than in the core product. 1 2 11 12
Search, retrieval & exit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
Full-text search on the OCR index with web, desktop and mobile access is well documented, including search from the ScanApp. We found no public information on metadata filters or saved searches, and nothing on a documented bulk export of documents together with metadata, versions and audit trail; the unlimited API use in the bundle hints at a path out, but no export procedure, schema or format is published. 1 8 14
The Records Manager
Intelligent full-text search with web, desktop and mobile access is documented, so finding a 2019 contract again looks plausible. But I found no public information on metadata filters or saved searches, and no documented bulk export of documents together with their metadata and versions — the exit path a buyer eventually needs is undocumented. 1 2 10 14
The IT Integrator
Full-text search over automatically OCR-indexed content plus web, desktop and mobile access is documented, and mobile capture flows into the same inbox. We found no public information on metadata filters, saved searches, or a bulk export of documents with their metadata, versions and audit trail — a real gap for me, softened only by the fact that local installation with a permitted backup copy means the archive physically sits on the customer's own hardware. 1 6 8 14
The Mittelstand Owner
Intelligent full-text search over every OCR-indexed document, with web, desktop and smartphone access, is well documented. I found no public information on metadata filters or saved searches, and bulk export of documents with their metadata on exit is undocumented — the terms only grant a backup copy of the software itself. 1 8 14
The Data Protection Officer
Full-text search over automatically OCR-indexed documents is documented, with access from the web browser, desktop and a smartphone app. I found no public information on metadata filters and saved searches, and nothing on bulk export of documents with their metadata, versions or audit data — how an operator exits this system with its contracts and personnel files is not described on the public pages. 1 8 10 14
The Skeptic
Full-text search is the core promise — intelligent full-text search, every document found in seconds, also from the smartphone through the web client. We found no public information on metadata filters, saved searches, or any documented bulk export of documents with their metadata, versions and audit trail; the captured pages say nothing about an exit path at all. 1 2 10 14
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
The pages show a locally installed product set up on the customer's own computer and systems including NAS, delivered as a download only, so documents do not sit in a vendor cloud. But the captured pages confirm nothing about the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, processing locations or subprocessors — privacy notices appear only for the ScanApp and for Zoom and Microsoft Teams webinars — and we found no public information on certifications or on where the AI image processing runs. 1 4 6 9
The Records Manager
The provenance names a German company and the captured pages describe local installation on the customer's own hardware with download-only delivery, so documents are not described as sitting in a vendor cloud. Still, I found no public information confirming the contracting entity on the vendor's own pages, and nothing on processing locations, a subprocessor list, or certifications such as ISO 27001 — including where the scan app's AI cropping runs. 1 6 9 14
The IT Integrator
The provenance identifies a German vendor and delivery is download-only onto the customer's own computer, so documents and their index stay on customer infrastructure rather than in a vendor cloud. The captured pages themselves leave the contracting entity and ownership unconfirmed, and we found no public information on a subprocessor list, certifications, or where the ScanApp's AI cropping happens. 6 9 14
The Mittelstand Owner
The software installs on my own server or NAS and arrives by download, so my documents stay on infrastructure I control — that part I like. But the captured pages do not confirm the contracting entity's jurisdiction, and I found no public information on subprocessors, certifications, or where the AI document processing runs. 4 6 9
The Data Protection Officer
The software installs on the customer's own computer or server and is delivered as a download, which keeps personnel files, health certificates and customer contracts under the operator's own roof — the strongest sovereignty fact here. Against that, the captured pages confirm neither the contracting entity's jurisdiction nor ownership details, publish no subprocessor list, and say nothing about where the ScanApp's AI processes document content, so the chain that touches my documents cannot be verified from public information. 4 6 9 14
The Skeptic
We found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction, its ownership, where data is processed, or a single subprocessor, and the one processing touchpoint documented is licence activation transmitting hardware information to the vendor's website. Local installation on the customer's own Windows, Linux or NAS hardware genuinely puts document storage in the customer's hands, which is worth something, but we found no public information on the rest of the chain behind support and activation. 4 5 6 9
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The GoBD Auditor
A from-price of "ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt." is published for the main product, the licence-models page carries sections titled licence model and prices for ecoDMS, the WORKZ add-on and ecoMAILZ, and updates for 24 or 48 months included with optional renewal are stated alongside a time-unlimited licence. The captured pages show no figures for the add-on, the email archive, the all-inclusive bundle or additional connections, so the total cost for a given team cannot be computed from what is public. 1 2 3
The Records Manager
One price is public — ecoDMS "ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt." — with updates included for 24 or 48 months and optionally renewable, and licence terms that are perpetual and transferable. But the captured pages show no prices for the WORKZ add-on, ecoMAILZ, additional concurrent connections or support packages, so the total cost of a given setup cannot be computed. 1 2 3 6
The IT Integrator
A public from-price of ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt. for the main licence, a perpetual transferable licence model, and an ecoDMS ONE bundle including support, maintenance and unlimited API use are stated, with updates included for 24 or 48 months. We found no public information on extension pricing for additional simultaneous connections, the cost of renewing updates afterwards, add-on and bundle prices, or partner implementation fees, so the total cost of a given setup is not computable from the captured pages. 1 2 3 6
The Mittelstand Owner
A published from-price of "ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt.", a perpetual transferable licence, updates included for 24 or 48 months with optional renewal, and a shop where add-ons, training and support are bought online — I can budget the licence before any partner visit. I found no public information on what the from-price covers per connection, the renewal price for updates, or partner implementation fees. 1 2 3 6
The Data Protection Officer
One figure is public — ecoDMS 'ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt.' — alongside update-inclusion periods of 24 or 48 months and an all-inclusive subscription (three connections, support and maintenance included) for which we found no public price. A licence-models page names prices for ecoDMS, the WORKZ add-on and ecoMAILZ, but the captured pages show no figures for add-ons, maintenance renewal, support or training, so the total cost is only partly computable. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
"ab 89,00 EUR inkl. 19% MwSt." is a real public from-price for the core product, and the licence model is unusually candid — time-unlimited, transferable, updates included for 24 or 48 months and optionally renewable after that. But we found no public prices for the WORKZ add-on, ecoMAILZ, ecoDMS One or the optional update renewals, so the cost of the full stack is not computable from the captured pages. 1 2 3 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 | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about ecoDMS
Is ecoDMS European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies ecoDMS as EU-Made.
Where does ecoDMS store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does ecoDMS have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to ecoDMS?
As of 15 Oct 2026, the panel rates AMAGNO (3/5), Doxis (3/5) and EASY Archive (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: ecoDMS 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 — 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.
- 23 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
- 13 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
- 4 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 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
- 3 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
- 3 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 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
- 1 subprocessors 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
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is 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.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Licence models www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Legal notice www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Terms of service www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Versioning, permissions & audit trail — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Search, retrieval & exit — found from sitemap www.ecodms.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →