whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

E-Signature

viSIGN

Provenance unknown 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 Validated ID S.L. · www.validatedid.com

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

Link to this page

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

viSIGN at a glance

Vendor
Validated ID S.L.
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates viSIGN 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. viSIGN, from Spanish vendor Validated ID, is an e-signature offering whose trust credentials show clearly and whose daily sending mechanics barely appear. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources

viSIGN alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Skeptic

Weighted verdict

Knows "legally binding" usually means a simple signature. Reads for the level the default plan actually signs at, the QTSP the provider does not operate itself, the per-QES and ident fees on top of the plan, the envelope limit, and "eIDAS-compliant" from a provider that names no trust service at all.

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

Scored by The Skeptic

Panel median The Skeptic 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 Skeptic
eIDAS levels & trust services 2 of 5 2 of 5
Signer identification 2 of 5 1.5 of 5
Signing workflow & signer experience 1 of 5 1 of 5
Evidence, validation & retention 1.5 of 5 1 of 5
Integrations & API 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
European sovereignty 2 of 5 1.5 of 5

eIDAS levels & trust services

How this is scored

Which signature levels the platform offers — simple, advanced, qualified, and qualified seals — through which qualified trust service provider on the EU Trust List, for which countries and legal regimes (eIDAS, ZertES), and on which plans.

0 — No signature level named; the platform calls its signature "legally binding" without saying which kind it is.

3 — Simple signatures by default with "advanced" or "qualified" mentioned as available, but no trust service provider named and no statement on which plan or country offers which level.

5 — SES, AdES and QES offered and labelled in the product, the qualified trust service provider named, and which documents need which level explained for at least Germany or the EU.

8 — Every level documented with the plans and countries it is available in, the QTSP's entry on the EU Trust List linked, QES under eIDAS (and ZertES where relevant) stated, qualified electronic seals for company documents, and the signature level printed in the signed document and audit trail.

10 — Levels are an explicit product decision: the provider is or contracts a named QTSP with its conformity assessment published, level selection per document type or template, remote QES without a separate account, EUDI wallet support stated with a date, and the legal effect per level documented for the main EU markets.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The vendor states it is a Qualified Trust Service Provider under eIDAS issuing digital certificates and qualified seals, so a real trust service is named rather than a bare "legally binding" label. The captured pages describe signatures by modality — handwritten on tablet, remote via smartphone, certificates, reliable communications — and we found no public information on simple, advanced and qualified levels being labelled per plan or country, or on the provider's entry on the EU Trust List. A named trust service, but the level-per-plan detail that would justify the middle of the scale is missing. 1 4

Report an error

Signer identification

How this is scored

How the signer is identified for each level: email and SMS codes, video ident, eID card (Online-Ausweis), bank ident or EUDI wallet — who performs it, in which countries it works, and what happens to the ID data afterwards.

0 — Email link only; no statement on how signers are authenticated.

3 — Email plus SMS or access code, with "ID verification" mentioned as an add-on but no methods, provider or countries named.

5 — Identification methods for AdES and QES listed by name (for example video ident, eID, bank ident), the identification provider named, and the countries or ID documents they accept stated.

8 — Methods documented per level and country, automated and agent-based ident distinguished, reuse of an identification for later signatures explained, retention and deletion of ID data stated, and the ident provider listed as subprocessor.

10 — Identification is transparent end to end: every method with its countries, assurance level and failure rate or completion guidance, EUDI wallet and national eID supported, ID data minimisation and retention committed, and the signer-facing privacy notice published.

Report an error

The Skeptic

Identification appears through the SSI products — VIDconnect with OpenID Connect SIOP v2, VIDwallet credential exchange, app-to-app and browser-to-app flows — and electronic identification is named a main service. We found no public information on identification methods per signature level such as video ident, eID or bank ident, on the countries or ID documents accepted, or on retention and deletion of ID data. Identification exists as a product line, but nothing on these pages ties it to the level a signer actually signs at. 2 6 7

Report an error

Signing workflow & signer experience

How this is scored

Getting a document out and back signed: templates and form fields, signing order and roles, bulk sending, reminders and delegation, signing without an account or app, mobile signing, and accessibility for signers.

0 — Single-recipient signing of an uploaded PDF; no templates, order or reminders.

3 — Multiple signers and basic templates, but no signing order, no bulk send, and signers must create an account.

5 — Templates with field placement, sequential and parallel signing order, automatic reminders and expiry, signing without an account on mobile, and a status overview for the sender.

8 — Roles and conditional fields, bulk sending, delegation and substitute signers, team and approval workflows, branded signer experience, signer languages listed, and signer accessibility addressed.

10 — The workflow is complete and documented: web forms and self-service signing links, mixed signature levels within one process, in-person and remote signing, a published accessibility conformance statement, and team administration with shared templates and audit of sender actions.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The pages evidence signature modalities — in person on a tablet, remote via smartphone, certificates, certified delivery — but we found no public information on templates and field placement, signing order, bulk sending, reminders, delegation, or signer accessibility. The legal notice only says registration is required to use the solutions as a user or customer, and says nothing about the signer's side. Slightly more than a bare upload-and-sign, only because the modalities are described. 1 2

Report an error

Evidence, validation & retention

How this is scored

What proves a signature years later: the audit trail and certificate of completion, qualified timestamps, long-term validation (PAdES-LTV), validation reports, and how long signed documents and evidence are kept — and whether they can leave the platform.

0 — A signed PDF and nothing else; no audit trail, no statement on storage or deletion.

3 — An audit trail or completion certificate exists, but its contents, the timestamp source and the retention period are unstated.

5 — Audit trail with signer events, IP addresses and authentication method embedded in or attached to the signed PDF, timestamps applied, documents downloadable, and the retention period stated.

8 — PAdES signatures with long-term validation, qualified timestamps from a named provider, a validation tool or report, configurable retention and automatic deletion, and bulk export of documents with their evidence.

10 — Evidence outlives the subscription: LTV and archive timestamps documented, validation verifiable with independent tools such as the EU DSS validator, export to a DMS or archive with evidence intact, and post-termination access and deletion committed in the terms.

Report an error

The Skeptic

A long-term signature format is claimed — PAdES-LT appears among the certifications alongside the QTSP status, and the CA documentation page lists policies, certificates, CRL and OCSP. We found no public information on an audit trail or completion certificate and its contents, on the timestamp source, or on how long signed documents and evidence are kept and whether they can be exported. The format that preserves a signature is named; what proves it years later is not described. 1 4

Report an error

Integrations & API

How this is scored

Signing from inside the systems where contracts are made: a documented API with webhooks and a sandbox, embedded signing, and connectors for Microsoft 365, CRM, HR, DMS and ERP systems.

0 — No API and no integrations; everything happens in the vendor's web app.

3 — A few named integrations or a Zapier connector, and an API mentioned without public documentation.

5 — A documented REST API with webhooks and a sandbox, plus connectors for Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace and at least one CRM or HR system named.

8 — Embedded signing in the customer's own application, API access to every signature level, versioned API with rate limits published, SDKs, and connectors for named DMS, ERP or HR systems with their scope.

10 — Integration is a product: white-label and embedded flows documented, API parity with the web app, a status page with incident history, deprecation policy, and a marketplace of integrations with stated maintainers.

Report an error

The Skeptic

A Developers section is linked in the footer, and VIDconnect is marketed as integrating simply and being compatible with the OpenID protocol — but for identity, not for signing. We found no public information on a documented signing API with webhooks and a sandbox, on embedded signing, or on connectors for Microsoft 365, CRM, HR, DMS or ERP systems. A developer area is mentioned without its documentation captured, which is exactly where this scale's low end sits. 4 6 7

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity, the trust service provider and their owners are, where documents, audit trails and ID data are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.

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

3 — An EU entity contracts, but documents or signer data are processed outside the EU by default without an explained safeguard, or the subprocessor list is absent.

5 — EU contracting entity and EU data storage stated, with a DPA, but the hosting, identification or trust service chain is non-EU-controlled without a stated safeguard.

8 — EU entity, documents, audit trails and ID data stored in named EU data centres, an EU qualified trust service provider, subprocessor list with locations published, and certifications (ISO 27001, ETSI conformity) published.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity and EU QTSP, every processing location and subprocessor European, customer-selectable data residency, and certifications with their scope published.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The contracting entity is clearly European: VALIDATED ID S.L.U., registered in the Barcelona Commercial Register, Spanish governing law with Madrid courts for legal entities, part of the Signaturit Group, with ISO 27001 and the Spanish ENS scheme among published certifications. We found no public information on where documents, audit trails and ID data are stored, or on any subprocessor list with locations. The EU entity is evidenced; the hosting and processing chain that sovereignty actually turns on is not. 1 2

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the cost of their signing volume from public pages alone — plan prices, envelope or document limits, the per-signature price of AdES and QES, identification fees, API pricing and overage.

0 — No public prices at all; every plan is a sales conversation.

3 — Plan prices published, but envelope limits, QES and identification fees are unstated — the cost of a qualified signature is unknowable.

5 — Plans with envelope or document limits priced, but at least one commonly incurred cost (per-QES fee, video ident, API access, overage) is missing or "on request".

8 — Every plan and limit priced publicly, AdES and QES priced per signature, identification fees and overage stated, API pricing published, and contract term and notice period given.

10 — Complete cost computability: the cost of a given monthly volume per signature level derivable from public pages, volume tiers published, and every add-on and price-change term on a public page.

Report an error

The Skeptic

No price appears anywhere in the captured pages — no plan prices, no envelope limits, no per-signature or identification fees, no API pricing. The only commercial call to action is "Request a demo", and the legal notice confirms registration is required to use the solutions. The cost of any signing volume, qualified or otherwise, is unknowable from public pages alone. 1 2

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 ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

Questions about viSIGN

Is viSIGN European?

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

Where does viSIGN store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

Does viSIGN have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to viSIGN?

As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates Scrive (3/5), Viafirma Documents (2.5/5) and Penneo (2.5/5) highest among the other 18 E-Signature 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 Scrive (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: viSIGN 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 viSIGN? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (7)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Security / trust page — found from the homepage www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 EIDAS levels & trust services — found from sitemap www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 EIDAS levels & trust services — found from sitemap www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Signer identification — found from sitemap www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Signer identification — found from sitemap www.validatedid.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →