Document Management (DMS)
OpenKM
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by OpenKM · www.openkm.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.
OpenKM at a glance
- Vendor
- OpenKM
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates OpenKM 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. OpenKM, a document management system whose captured pages carry a Palma de Mallorca address, is strongest on document workflows, scored 4-6 on a native OKMFlow engine documenting review, approval and validation steps, serial and parallel routing, task assignment to users or groups, monitoring, and per-node execution logs with graph views. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 4 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
OpenKM, a document management system whose captured pages carry a Palma de Mallorca address, is strongest on document workflows, scored 4-6 on a native OKMFlow engine documenting review, approval and validation steps, serial and parallel routing, task assignment to users or groups, monitoring, and per-node execution logs with graph views. Capture and indexing follows at 4-5, on OCR plugins that extract date, number, text and barcode values by pattern, a Windows scanner utility, and an Invoice Capture application that catalogs PDF invoices automatically. The weak end is compliance: audit-proof archiving scores 0-2 and versioning and permissions 2-3, because the captured permissions pages document administration access levels only and the archiving pages describe developer utilities for ZIP and JAR files. The judges split on that silence — some marked audit-proof archiving not rated for lack of public information while others scored the same pages 1 and 2. Sovereignty sits at 4 on a Spanish entity and self-hosting; search and portability scores 2-3, and the only public price is the free Community Edition.
Speaks for it
- Document workflows scored 4-6, the strongest-scoring category, on a native OKMFlow engine with review, approval and validation workflows, serial and parallel routing, and per-node execution logs with graph views
- Capture and indexing scored 4-5, with OCR plugins that extract date, number, text and barcode values from OCR text by pattern, plus a Windows scanner utility and an Invoice Capture application that catalogs PDF invoices automatically
- Sovereignty scores sit at 4, on a published Spanish legal entity at c/ Bunyola 13, 07004 Palma de Mallorca and vendor pages stating the system runs on your own servers
- The Community Edition is described as free, with source code at GitHub for versions prior to 7.0
Held against it
- Audit-proof archiving scored 0-2; the captured archiving pages document developer utilities for ZIP and JAR files, and we found no public information on retention periods or immutability of archived documents
- Versioning and permissions scored 2-3; the captured permissions pages cover administration access levels only, and we found no public information on version history or a log of who read or changed a document
- Search and portability scored 2-3; search is documented as one phrase on the vendor's own pages and the only export documentation captured is developer utilities that package directories into ZIP and JAR archives
- The connectors named on the captured pages are a Bonita connector and a Joomla explorer, and we found no public information on DATEV, ERP or Microsoft 365 integration
- The captured pages give two different company names for the licensing entity, and we found no public information on cloud data residency, subprocessors or a data processing agreement
Best for
- You need approval and review workflows with task assignment, monitoring and execution logs, running on your own servers
- Your intake is mostly scanned paper and PDF invoices processed with pattern-based OCR extraction
- You want a free Community Edition to evaluate before committing to a paid deployment
- You want a Spanish legal entity as contracting party with a self-hosted option
Avoid if
- You need audit-proof, retention-based archiving; audit-proof archiving scored 0-2 and the captured archiving documentation covers only ZIP and JAR file utilities
- You must show version history, check-in and check-out, or who opened and changed each document; versioning and permissions scored 2-3 and the captured permissions pages document administration access levels
- Your accounting process depends on handover to DATEV or an ERP system; the connectors actually named on the captured pages are Bonita and a Joomla explorer
- You need a documented exit with bulk export carrying metadata and versions; search and portability scored 2-3 and the only export evidence is developer ZIP and JAR utilities
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Capture, OCR & indexing | 2.5 of 5 |
| Versioning, permissions & audit trail | 1.5 of 5 |
| Audit-proof archiving & retention | 1 of 5 |
| Document workflows & integrations | 2.5 of 5 |
| Search, retrieval & exit | 1.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 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 — Not a document intake tool: files cannot be uploaded or captured into the product as documents.
3 — Upload, drag-and-drop or scan import with full-text OCR; email intake, document types and field extraction are basic or not described.
5 — Scanner or app capture and email intake, full-text OCR, and document types with metadata fields, some filled automatically (date, sender, amount or similar).
8 — AI- or rule-based classification and field extraction with 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
Scanning arrives via a Windows scanner tool and a hot folder, and the built-in OCR plugins extract date, number, text and barcode values by pattern — rule-based extraction that is more than basic import. But we found no public information on email or Microsoft 365 intake, on document types with metadata fields, or on XRechnung and ZUGFeRD being read as structured data; invoices are handled as PDF documents. 2 3 4
The Records Manager
A Windows scanner tool and a Hot Folder get paper and files in, and the OCR data capture plugins fill date, number, string and barcode values from OCR text by pattern, with an Invoice Capture application that catalogs PDF invoices automatically. I found no public information on reading XRechnung or ZUGFeRD as structured data, on a validation step before filing, on mailbox or Microsoft 365 intake, or on duplicate detection — and invoices arrive as PDFs to be read, which is exactly the picture-of-an-invoice problem I want gone. 2 3 4
The IT Integrator
Intake shows a Windows scanner tool, a hot folder and an Invoice Capture web application that receives and automatically catalogs PDF invoices, while the built-in OCR plugins extract date, number, text and barcode values from OCR output using patterns. We found no public information on mailbox or Microsoft 365 intake, duplicate detection, or XRechnung and ZUGFeRD being read as structured data. 2 3 4
The Mittelstand Owner
There is a Windows scanner tool, an invoice application that receives and automatically catalogues PDF invoices, and OCR capture plugins that pull dates, numbers and barcodes out of text with matching patterns. What I need most — XRechnung or ZUGFeRD read as structured data, mailbox intake, and duplicate checks — we found no public information on, so this reads as scanning with pattern extraction rather than e-invoice intake. 2 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
The documented intake is a Windows scanner utility plus built-in OCR data-capture plugins that extract date, number, string and barcode values from OCR text by pattern, and a Professional-edition Invoice Capture application that catalogs invoice PDFs automatically. We found no public information on XRechnung or ZUGFeRD being read as structured data, on email or Microsoft 365 intake, on duplicate detection, or — the question I must ask as data protection officer — on which provider or processing location reads documents during capture. 3 4 2
The Skeptic
Where the documentation exists it is refreshingly concrete: OCR data-capture plugins that lift a date, a number, free text or a barcode into typed fields by pattern, with defined error behaviour, plus a Windows scanner utility and an Invoice Capture application that catalogs invoices automatically. Around it, we found no public information on a validation step, duplicate detection, or XRechnung and ZUGFeRD read as structured data — and the invoice app is documented as not compatible with the Community edition, so the capture a paying buyer gets is the only capture documented. 2 3 4
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 — A file drop without users or history: anyone with access sees and overwrites everything, by the vendor's own description.
3 — Version history and folder or workspace permissions; check-out, roles and an audit log are basic or not described.
5 — Version history with restore, users, roles or groups with rights per folder or document type, and a log of who changed or accessed documents.
8 — Check-in and check-out, metadata-driven permissions (by department, client or confidentiality), an 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
The administration pages show a role-based system in which administrators grant and edit users' administration access levels, which is a permissions story of sorts. We found no public information on version history, rights per folder or document type, check-in and check-out, or an audit log of who read or changed a document. 5 6
The Records Manager
What the captured pages show is an administration permission model: role-based access levels, editable per user, governing who may administer the application. I found no public information on version history or restore, check-in and check-out, rights per folder or document type, or a log of who opened or changed a document — the workflow log records process history, not document access, and when a 2019 contract is lost I need the version trail, not the process trail. 5 6 10
The IT Integrator
The documentation covers an admin permission feature that sets administration access levels per user and role, down to granting access only to manage users and roles. We found no public information on version history, check-in and check-out, document-level rights, single sign-on or an audit trail. 5 6
The Mittelstand Owner
The documentation shows administrators assigning access levels per user by role, down to granting someone only user and role management, which is a start on permissions. We found no public information on version history, check-in and check-out, or a log of who opened or changed a document, and I would not put contracts somewhere I cannot answer that question. 5 6
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages document an admin permission feature that sets administration access levels per user and role, with a table of users holding administrative access. We found no public information on document version history, check-in and check-out, or an audit log of reads and changes — precisely what I need evidenced before personnel files and health certificates live in one repository. 5 6
The Skeptic
The permissions pages document administration access only: a table of users by admin role and an edit action to change each user's administration access level — rights over the tool, with no captured evidence of rights per folder, document or confidentiality. We found no public information on version history, check-in and check-out, or a log of who read or changed a document. For a product pitched at companies and public institutions, that silence is the finding. 1 5 6
Audit-proof archiving & retention
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
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 — Not an archive: a file store or collaboration space in which, by the vendor's own description, documents can be edited or deleted at any time and no retention function exists.
3 — "GoBD-konform" or "revisionssicher" archiving claimed, or retention mentioned; how immutability is achieved and how retention is configured are basic or not described.
5 — GoBD-compliant archiving stated with archived documents protected against change, retention periods configurable per document type, and GoBD guidance or a sample Verfahrensdokumentation offered.
8 — An auditor's report (IDW PS 880 or comparable) published or named with its scope and date, WORM or equivalent storage described, deletion after expiry and 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 not rated — no public information
We found no public information on GoBD-compliant, revisionssichere archiving — no retention periods per document type, no immutability mechanism, no auditor's report, no legal hold and no Z1–Z3 tax-audit export. The documentation pages we read on the topic of archives are developer utilities for creating and editing ZIP and JAR files, which is not retention archiving; we captured the homepage and those documentation pages. 1 7 8
The Records Manager not rated — no public information
I found no public information on audit-proof archiving: nothing on immutability of archived documents, retention periods, deletion after expiry, legal hold, or tax-audit data access. The pages I read under this heading describe developer utilities for creating ZIP and JAR archives from directories, which is file packaging, not revisionssichere storage, and no auditor's report is named anywhere in the captures. 7 8
The IT Integrator not rated — no public information
We found no public information on retention periods, immutability of archived documents or GoBD compliance; the pages captured under archiving document only developer utilities for creating ZIP and JAR file archives. 7 8
The Mittelstand Owner
The only archiving documentation captured is developer utilities that create ZIP and JAR archives from directories, which is about compressed files, not about an archive an auditor will accept. We found no public information on retention periods per document type, immutability of stored documents, or tax-audit access, so the Finanzamt question stays open. 7 8
The Data Protection Officer
The only archiving-related documentation captured is a set of developer utilities for creating ZIP and JAR archives and deleting files from a ZIP. We found no public information on immutability of archived documents, retention schedules, deletion after expiry, tax-audit export, or how GDPR deletion would be reconciled with retention duties. 7 8
The Skeptic not rated — no public information
We found no public information on audit-proof archiving or retention: no retention schedules, no immutability of archived documents, no auditor's report, and no 'revisionssicher' or GoBD claim to interrogate. The only archiving content on the captured pages is a set of developer utilities that create ZIP and JAR archives and delete files from a ZIP by extension — compression helpers, not an archive a tax auditor would recognise. 7 8
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 — Storage only: the product is described as an archive or file store with no tasks, approvals or connections to other systems.
3 — An approval, sharing or task step and a few named integrations; a workflow designer and an API are basic or not described.
5 — Configurable approval or invoice workflows with tasks and deadlines, Microsoft 365 or Outlook integration, and an API or connectors to named accounting or ERP systems such as DATEV.
8 — Graphical workflow modelling without code with substitutes and escalation, invoice workflow with ERP or DATEV handover documented, connectors for named ERP systems (SAP, Microsoft Dynamics, DATEV) with their scope, a documented REST API with 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
The workflows pages document review, approval and validation workflows with serial and parallel paths, task assignment to users and groups, monitoring, and a workflow execution log with a status diagram, plus a native workflow engine and a Bonita connector. We found no public information on DATEV or ERP handover, Microsoft 365 integration, substitutes and escalation, or a documented API with webhooks, so the connector side stays thin. 2 9 10
The Records Manager
Workflows are well evidenced: a native workflow engine with visual design, serial and parallel flows, review, approval and validation steps, task assignment to users and groups, monitoring, and a graph and log view per repository node. The connector picture is narrower — a Bonita connector, a Joomla explorer and Windows tools including a digital signature client — and I found no public information on DATEV or ERP handover, deadlines, substitutes and escalation, or a documented REST API with webhooks. 9 10 2
The IT Integrator
Workflows are genuinely documented: a native OKMFlow engine with serial and parallel processes, review, approval and validation steps, task assignment to users and groups, monitoring, and a chronological execution log with a graph view. The integration side is thin for my purposes — the named connections are a Bonita connector, a Joomla explorer and Windows desktop tools, and we found no public information on connectors to DATEV or ERP systems with a stated scope, or on a documented REST API with webhooks. 2 9 10
The Mittelstand Owner
Approval, review and validation workflows with task assignment to users or groups, serial and parallel paths, monitoring, a diagram showing where a case stands, and a detailed execution log are all documented — that is genuinely the approval flow I want for invoices. But the connectors actually named are Bonita and a Joomla explorer, and we found no public information on ERP or DATEV handover, Microsoft 365 or Outlook ties, or escalation and substitute rules, so the approvals may live on an island from my accounting. 9 10 2
The Data Protection Officer
A native workflow engine is documented with visual modelling, serial and parallel flows, task assignment to users and groups, monitoring, and a per-node execution log with a graph of the current task. Beyond a Bonita connector and Windows utilities, we found no public information on connectors to ERP or accounting systems such as DATEV or SAP, a documented REST API, deadlines and escalation, or e-signature integration. 9 10 2
The Skeptic
The workflow engine is documented in more detail than most of this product: review, approval and validation workflows, serial and parallel routing, tasks assigned to groups or users, monitoring of statuses and processes, a per-node execution history with a status graph, and a native engine named OKMFlow. We found no public information on deadlines, substitutes or escalation, an API and its scope, Microsoft 365 or Outlook integration, or connectors to accounting and ERP systems — the named connectors are Bonita and Joomla. 2 9 10
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 — No search and no way to get documents out again beyond opening them one by one in the product.
3 — Full-text or file-name search and single-document download; metadata filters and bulk export are basic or not described.
5 — Full-text and metadata search with filters, web and mobile access, and documents downloadable in bulk or in their original format.
8 — Saved searches and search across versions and attachments with permissions respected, bulk export of documents with their metadata (CSV, XML or similar) and versions 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 including the audit trail, 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
Intelligent global search is claimed on the vendor's own pages, and the developer documentation includes utilities that create ZIP archives from directories. But we found no public information on full-text or metadata search with filters, mobile access, a documented bulk export with metadata and versions, or on exit and post-termination retrieval. 7 8 9
The Records Manager
An intelligent global search is named in one sentence, and export appears only as developer utilities that build ZIP or JAR archives from a directory. I found no public information on full-text versus metadata search with filters, saved searches, mobile access, or a documented bulk export that carries metadata and version history out together with the documents — and a documented exit is the first thing I ask about. 9 7 8
The IT Integrator
The product pages promise an intelligent global search, and the SDK documents methods that recursively package a directory into a ZIP archive, giving a developer at least a programmatic bulk export path. We found no public information on metadata filters, saved searches, mobile access, or a documented import path from another DMS or file share. 7 8 9
The Mittelstand Owner
An intelligent global search is promised, and developer utilities can wrap a directory into a ZIP archive, which is at least a programmatic way out. We found no public information on metadata filters, saved searches, mobile access, or a documented export of documents with their metadata and history at the end of a contract, so the exit is left to trust. 9 7
The Data Protection Officer
The vendor states documents can be retrieved with an intelligent global search, and the developer toolkit can package directories into ZIP and JAR archives. We found no public information on metadata filters, saved searches, mobile access, or a documented bulk export including metadata, versions and audit trail for the day the contract ends. 9 7 8
The Skeptic
Search is one marketing phrase — documents 'can be easily retrieved with intelligent global search' — with nothing on whether that is full text or metadata, on filters, saved searches or mobile access. The only export evidence is programmatic: utilities that create a ZIP or JAR from a directory. For a buyer planning an exit, we found no public information on bulk export of documents with their metadata and versions in a documented structure. 7 8 9
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 — Proven non-EU on every dimension the evidence covers: non-EU contracting entity and non-EU storage of documents, with no EU or on-premises option stated.
3 — One European element proven: an EU contracting entity, EU data centres for the cloud edition, an on-premises edition, or a published DPA, with the rest of the chain unstated.
5 — EU contracting entity and EU data centres stated for the cloud edition, or an on-premises edition, with a DPA offered; the subprocessor chain (hosting, AI processing, support) is unstated or partly non-EU.
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 state the software runs on your own servers and publish an address in Palma de Mallorca, Spain, under an S.L. company — with a second company name appearing in the Invoice Capture licence text. We found no public information on where any cloud edition would store and process documents, on a data processing agreement, subprocessors, or certifications such as ISO 27001 or BSI C5. 1 2 4 9
The Records Manager
The captured pages place the contracting entity in Spain — Open Document Management System S.L. at a Palma de Mallorca address, while one licence page names OpenKM Knowledge Management System S.L., so the two captures give different company names — and the system is described as running on your own servers. Beyond that the chain is unstated: I found no public information on a data processing agreement, cloud data-centre locations, subprocessors, or certifications. 1 2 9 4
The IT Integrator
A Spanish legal entity with a Palma de Mallorca address is published, and the software is described as running on the customer's own servers, which gives me a European contracting party and a self-hosted deployment option. We found no public information on cloud data residency, a DPA, subprocessors or certifications, and the captured pages give two different company names for the licensing entity. 1 2 4 9
The Mittelstand Owner
The captured pages name Open Document Management System S.L. at an address in Palma de Mallorca, Spain, and describe an infrastructure that runs on your own servers, so a Spanish contracting entity and self-hosted operation are both on the table. We found no public information on where a cloud edition would store documents and metadata, on subprocessors, a data processing agreement, or certifications, so the rest of the chain stays dark. 1 2 9
The Data Protection Officer
The copyright notice names a Spanish limited company at a Palma de Mallorca address and the platform is described as running on the customer's own servers, giving me an EU entity and an on-premises option; note the captured pages give two different Spanish entities, as the Invoice Capture licence names OpenKM Knowledge Management System S.L. We found no public information on where documents and metadata are stored in any hosted deployment, on the subprocessor chain, on a published data processing agreement, or on who processes content during the automatic cataloguing. 1 2 4 9
The Skeptic
Two European elements are proven: the vendor names Open Document Management System S.L. at an address in Palma de Mallorca, Spain, and the homepage states the system 'runs on your own servers'. Everything behind that is dark — we found no public information on data residency for a cloud edition, subprocessors, a data processing agreement, or where any OCR or AI processing runs — and the captured pages give different company names, with the invoice-capture licence published by OpenKM Knowledge Management System S.L. 1 2 4
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
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 public "from" price or one priced edition, per user or flat.
5 — Prices per user or per edition public for the main editions with the billing period stated and the main inclusions listed.
8 — Every edition and module priced publicly, storage limits and overage stated, on-premises licence and maintenance terms given, onboarding priced, 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
The only price we found is that the Community edition is free, while Invoice Capture requires the Professional edition, whose price is not published — buyers are routed to a demo request. We found no public prices for editions, storage, maintenance or implementation. 1 2 4
The Records Manager
One edition carries a public cost: the Community Edition is described as free, while the Professional edition that the active Invoice Capture release requires has no public price and the pages point buyers to request a demo. I found no public per-user or per-edition prices, storage limits, maintenance or on-premises licence terms, or contract and notice periods. 2 4 1
The IT Integrator
The Community Edition is publicly described as free and downloadable, which is one edition with a public price. The Invoice Capture compatibility table points to a professional edition, and we found no public information on prices for the commercial editions, per-user rates or billing terms. 1 2 4
The Mittelstand Owner
The only public price statement is that the Community Edition is free; beyond that, we found no public information on prices for the paid editions, per-user costs, storage, maintenance, or contract terms, and the homepage points to requesting a demo instead. Before a partner visit I could not put a number on a forty-seat deployment from these pages. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The Community Edition is publicly stated as free and downloadable, and a demo can be requested from the vendor. We found no public prices for the professional edition or modules, storage limits, on-premises licence and maintenance terms, implementation partner fees, or contract and notice terms. 2 1
The Skeptic
The only public number is zero: 'If you are looking for a free cost, then "Community" is yours.' The invoice-capture documentation requires a professional edition whose price appears nowhere, and the offered path is 'Request DEMO' — a quote, not a price list. We found no public information on what the paid editions cost, per user or otherwise. 1 2 4
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about OpenKM
Is OpenKM European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where OpenKM is based.
Where does OpenKM store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
Does OpenKM have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to OpenKM?
As of 4 Nov 2026, the panel rates AMAGNO (3.5/5), PaperOffice (3.5/5) and Doxis (3/5) highest among the other 21 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: OpenKM alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 3 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Open source, Legal entity, Hosting options. 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.
- We found no public information on pricing on the pages we read (openkm.com, openkm.com/en/open-source-document-management-system.html, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.2/built-in-ocr-data-capture-plugins, docs.openkm.com/invoice-capture, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.2/admin-permissions, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.1/admin-permissions and 4 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- We found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (openkm.com, openkm.com/en/open-source-document-management-system.html, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.2/built-in-ocr-data-capture-plugins, docs.openkm.com/invoice-capture, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.2/admin-permissions, docs.openkm.com/okm-8.1/admin-permissions and 4 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 3 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Open-source licence page — found from the homepage www.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Capture, OCR & indexing — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Versioning, permissions & audit trail — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Versioning, permissions & audit trail — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Audit-proof archiving & retention — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap www.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Document workflows & integrations — found from sitemap docs.openkm.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →