Employee Scheduling
Quinyx
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Quinyx AB · www.quinyx.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Quinyx, a workforce-management platform from Sweden's Quinyx AB with a German subsidiary in Hamburg, lands mid-band: weighted totals run 2.9 to 3.6 across the panel. It is strongest on staff self-service and codetermination and privacy, both scored 4 with no spread — an employee mobile app for shifts, communication and time tracking is documented, and the privacy policy itemises stored data down to social security numbers and states that geofencing stores no location data. It is weakest on payroll and integrations, scored 2 to 3, where the pages name no payroll system, and on sovereignty, scored 2 to 3, where hosting region and the subprocessor list are undocumented beyond 'approved subprocessors'. Working time rules sits at a flat 3: automatic compliance is claimed, but no specific rule — the eleven-hour rest period, breaks, surcharges — is named. The genuine split is roster planning, scored 2 to 5: the skeptic saw capability claims without planning mechanics, the payroll officer credited documented AI forecasting and automated optimisation, with the other scores at 4. No prices are published; plans come through a contact form.
Speaks for it
- An employee mobile app for shifts, communication and time tracking is documented
- The pages state geofencing is used for push clock-in and clock-out reminders and that no location data is stored
- The privacy policy itemises stored data including social security numbers, next-of-kin contacts, availability and timestamps
- Retention is stated as employer retention followed by statutory periods and limited backups
Held against it
- We found no public information on a named payroll system, export format or surcharge handling
- No specific working-time rule — daily maximum, eleven-hour rest period, breaks, surcharges — is named on the captured pages
- The captured pages state no hosting region and give subprocessors only as 'approved' without a list
- The captured pages give different figures for the Swedish supervisory authority (Datainspektionen and IMY)
- No prices appear publicly; plans are assembled through a contact form
Best for
- You run multi-site teams in retail, hospitality or logistics and want scheduling, communication and time tracking on one platform
- You want staff to see their shifts, message and clock in and out from a mobile app
- You value a privacy policy that itemises stored data, states retention and says geofencing stores no location data
Avoid if
- You need a documented handoff to a named payroll system such as DATEV or LODAS before committing
- You must see specific working-time rules — the eleven-hour rest period, breaks, Minijob limits, surcharges — enforced in the planner before buying
- Your procurement requires a stated hosting region and a published subprocessor list
The scores
Roster building & demand planning
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How a plan gets built across locations, roles and qualifications — templates, staffing requirements, forecasting from sales or occupancy, and whether the product proposes a roster or only draws one.
0 — A shared calendar of shifts; no templates, no roles or qualifications, and no notion of how many people a shift needs.
3 — Shift templates and a weekly grid per location, with roles attached, but staffing needs and qualifications are the planner's memory rather than the system's.
5 — Templates, roles and qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts, multiple locations and departments, and coverage gaps shown before publication.
8 — Demand-based planning from a named data source (POS revenue, footfall, occupancy or bookings), automatic roster proposals the planner can accept or adjust, labour cost shown against budget while planning, and cross-location staff sharing.
10 — Planning closes the loop: forecast, proposed roster and actual hours compared in one place, the proposal explains which rule or demand figure drove each assignment, and the vendor documents the forecasting method rather than calling it AI.
The Shift Manager
The pages promise automated scheduling optimization and AI-supported demand and staffing forecasting, with labour costs, overtime and time tracking held centrally across teams, locations and regions — more than a static calendar. But we found no public information on shift templates, role and qualification checks, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts, or coverage gaps shown before publication, and no named data source behind the forecast. Enough ambition to sit above a basic weekly grid, but none of the mechanics I build a Thursday-night roster with. 1 2
The Operations Director
The captured pages promise AI-supported demand forecasting, automated scheduling optimisation and a central view of labour costs across sites and regions, but we found no public information on templates, roles, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts or coverage gaps, and nothing on cross-location staff sharing. No data source behind the forecast is named — no POS revenue, footfall or occupancy figure — and the method behind the AI claim is undocumented, so demand-based planning and cost-against-budget-while-editing cannot be verified at all. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Demand and staffing forecasting is offered with AI support and scheduling is described as automated and optimised, with labour costs, overtime and time tracking held in one view across teams, sites and regions. We found no public information on templates, qualifications, per-shift staffing requirements, open shifts or coverage-gap checks before publication, and no data source behind the forecast is named — the method is presented as AI rather than documented. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Scheduling with automated optimisation and KI-supported demand forecasting is marketed across teams, sites and regions, but the forecasting method is only called AI and we found no public information on which data source drives it. We also found no public information on templates, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift or coverage gaps, and labour costs appear as a central dashboard rather than shown against budget while planning. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
The pages describe workforce scheduling, automated scheduling optimization and AI-supported demand and staffing forecasting, with labour costs, overtime and time tracking in one view across teams, locations and regions. Beyond these marketing-level claims we found no public information on shift templates, roles and qualifications, open shifts, coverage gaps, or which data source feeds the forecast, which is where the evidence stops. 1 2
The Skeptic
The pages promise "KI-gestützter" demand and staffing forecasting plus automated scheduling optimisation, but name no data source the forecast draws on — no POS revenue, footfall, occupancy or bookings figure appears — and we found no public information on shift templates, qualifications, per-shift staffing requirements, open shifts or coverage gaps before publication. What is shown is capability claims for multi-site chains, not planning mechanics; which tier any of it sits in is equally undocumented. 1 2
Working-time law & collective agreements
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the roster knows the rules it is subject to — ArbZG rest periods and maximum hours, youth and maternity protection, Minijob earnings limits, Tarifvertrag and works-agreement rules, surcharges — and whether it enforces them, warns, or leaves them to the export.
0 — No working-time rules described anywhere; the pages mention no check on daily hours, breaks or rest periods.
3 — Compliance is claimed as "supported" but the pages name no specific rule, or only a generic overtime warning exists.
5 — Named checks for the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period and breaks, plus a Minijob earnings warning, shown to the planner before publication; whether the check blocks or only warns is stated.
8 — Configurable rule sets per contract or employee group covering Tarifvertrag surcharges (night, Sunday, holiday), time accounts, youth-protection limits and works-agreement rules, with the planner's override of a violation recorded and reasoned.
10 — The rules are modelled as law, not as warnings: maintained rule sets for named collective agreements, sector-specific exceptions (care, hospitality) documented with the statute they rely on, every override attributable, and published guidance mapping each feature to the provision it serves.
The Shift Manager
Compliance is claimed emphatically — labour-law requirements are said to be applied automatically to every schedule and shift, with automated monitoring against labour laws and company policies, and the vendor advertises no compliance violations as an outcome. But the captured pages name no specific rule: nothing on the eleven-hour rest period, breaks, daily maximum hours, Minijob limits or collective-agreement surcharges, and nothing on whether a violation blocks publication or only warns. A general promise, not a rule set I can lean on. 1 2
The Operations Director
Compliance is claimed as fully automatic — labour-law requirements are 'automatically' considered for all schedules and shifts — but the pages name no specific rule anywhere. We found no public information on the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period, breaks, Minijob earnings limits, Tarifvertrag surcharges or youth protection, so as far as the evidence goes this is a badge rather than a rule set. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Compliance is claimed to be automatic — labour-law requirements "automatisch für alle Dienstpläne und Schichten berücksichtigt" — but the pages name no specific rule. We found no public information on the ArbZG daily maximum, the eleven-hour rest period, breaks, Minijob earnings limits, or night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, so every supplement and the Minijob ceiling stay manual until the close. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Compliance is claimed as automatic for every plan and shift and monitored against labour law and company policies, yet no specific rule — daily maximum, eleven-hour rest, breaks, Minijob limit or a collective-agreement surcharge — is named on the captured pages. We found no public information on whether a violation blocks publication or only warns. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
Compliance is claimed as built in and applied automatically to every plan and shift, with automated monitoring against labour laws and company policies, but the pages name no specific rule — we found no public information on a daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period, breaks, Minijob limits or collective-agreement surcharges. A blanket assurance is not a rule set a planner or an employee can check. 1 2
The Skeptic
"Arbeitsrechtliche Anforderungen werden automatisch für alle Dienstpläne und Schichten berücksichtigt" is the entire compliance story — not one specific rule is named, no daily-hours maximum, no 11-hour rest period, no breaks, no Minijob limit, no Tarifvertrag surcharge — and the pages never say whether a violation is blocked, warned about before publication, or only monitored afterwards; the "keine Compliance-Verstöße" line is a customer outcome claim, not a mechanism. 1 2
Mobile self-service for deskless staff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the employee on the shop floor actually gets: a mobile app to read the roster, enter availability, request and accept swaps, claim open shifts and clock in — in their language, on their own device or a shared one.
0 — No employee access; the roster is printed or sent as a PDF.
3 — A read-only app or web view of one's own shifts, with changes still requested by phone or chat.
5 — Mobile app with availability entry, absence requests, shift-swap requests with manager approval, open-shift claiming and push notification of changes.
8 — Swaps and open shifts resolved under the rule set (qualifications and rest periods checked before approval), clock-in by app or shared terminal with offline handling, multilingual interface, and team communication that keeps shift talk out of private messengers.
10 — Self-service is designed for people who never open a laptop: swap and cover flows that resolve without a manager where the rules allow, accessibility and language coverage stated, use on a shared or personal device both supported, and employees able to see and export the data held about them.
The Shift Manager
There is a real employee mobile app for managing shifts, communication and time tracking, with geofenced push reminders to clock in and out, and the system holds availability, shifts and timestamps. We found no public information on shift-swap requests, open-shift claiming, absence requests from the app, language coverage or offline handling. Better than a read-only view, but I cannot tell whether my Saturday-morning cover hunt runs through the app or still through private messengers. 1 2 3
The Operations Director
A mobile app is confirmed for managing shifts, communication and time tracking, with push clock-in/out reminders via geofencing, and the documented data set shows availability, absences and internal messaging are genuinely part of the product. But we found no public information on shift-swap requests, open-shift claiming or manager approval flows, and nothing on language coverage, offline use or shared devices. 1 2 3
The Payroll Officer
A mobile employee app for shifts, communication and time tracking is documented, with app-based clock-in via geofencing, push reminders for punching in and out, and in-app messaging alongside availability and absences held as data. We found no public information on employee-entered availability, swap requests with manager approval, open-shift claiming or push notification of schedule changes, nor on languages or offline use. 1 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
An employee app for managing shifts, communication and time tracking exists, with push reminders to clock in and out, and availability, absences and Qmail messages appear among the stored data — more than a read-only plan. We found no public information on shift-swap or open-shift flows, multilingual coverage or shared devices. 1 2 3
The Frontline Employee
An employee mobile app for shifts, communication and time tracking is confirmed, with geofenced push reminders to clock in and out and messaging that keeps shift talk out of private chats; a customer case says staff reach their schedule anytime. But we found no public information on entering availability, requesting or accepting a shift swap, claiming open shifts, notification of schedule changes, or which languages the app offers — the exact flows a phone-first worker judges the product by. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
An employee app for shifts, communication and time tracking is evidenced, and geofencing with push reminders to clock in and out — said to store no location data — suggests app-based stamping, with availability, absences and Qmail messages named among stored data. But we found no public information on shift-swap requests, open-shift claiming, manager approval flows, multilingual coverage or offline handling, which is what separates a real floor-worker app from a shift viewer with a chat. 2 3
Works council & employee data
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the product can be introduced under co-determination (BetrVG § 87) — role-based visibility, what is logged, which monitoring can be switched off, retention of availability, absence and location data — and whether the vendor supplies what a works agreement needs.
0 — No roles or visibility settings described, no statement of what is stored, logged or retained, and GPS or activity tracking presented without any mention of switching it off.
3 — Basic admin and employee roles exist, but visibility of absence reasons or location data is not configurable and retention is unstated.
5 — Configurable roles limiting who sees whose data, GPS and similar tracking optional and off by default or stated as switchable, a published DPA, and a retention or deletion statement for employee records.
8 — Fine-grained visibility (absence reasons hidden from colleagues and line managers where not needed), an audit log of who viewed and changed an individual's data, configurable deletion periods, and documentation the vendor offers for works-council approval.
10 — Data minimisation is designed in and evidenced: a model works agreement or feature-by-feature data inventory published, no performance or behaviour scoring of individuals, monitoring functions individually deactivatable, and deletion executed automatically per configured period.
The Shift Manager
The privacy policy is unusually concrete about what an employer can store — from availability and shifts to social security numbers and Qmail messages — states how long data is kept after employment ends, and says geofencing stores no location data. But we found no public information on role-based visibility, who may see absence reasons, audit logs of views or changes, configurable deletion periods, or documentation a works council could work with, and app usage details including clicks are processed with no stated way to switch that off. A good inventory, nothing for the works-council negotiation. 2 3
The Operations Director
The privacy policy is specific and honest: it lists exactly what is stored (including availability, time stamps, absences and messages), states retention follows the employer's data plus statutory periods and limited backups, names a DPO, and states location data is not stored despite geofencing. What I do not see is role-based visibility of absence reasons, an audit log, configurable deletion periods, or any documentation offered for a works-council agreement. 1 2 3
The Payroll Officer
The privacy policy inventories exactly what is stored — down to social security numbers, next of kin, availability, timestamps and Qmail messages — states a retention path after the employment ends, and says geofencing runs without storing location data. We found no public information on configurable visibility of sensitive data, an audit log of who viewed an individual's records, configurable deletion periods, or documentation offered for works-council approval. 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
The privacy policy inventories honestly what is stored — social security number, next of kin, availability, time stamps — states that geofencing stores no location data, and gives a retention answer ending in statutory storage and limited backups. But we found no public information on role-based visibility of absence reasons, an audit log of who viewed whose data, configurable deletion periods, or documentation for works-council approval. Telemetry of every click and function an employee uses, and real-time analytics on workforce performance, are disclosed with nothing saying they can be switched off — a system that measures behaviour must show the off switch before any works agreement. 2 3
The Frontline Employee
The privacy policy publishes a full inventory of what is held on employees — availability, shifts, timestamps, absences, messages — states that data is kept as long as the employer retains it followed by statutory retention and limited backups, and says geofencing stores no location data. We found no public information on configurable role-based visibility, an audit log of who viewed whose data, or materials for a works-council agreement, while third-party cookies for statistics and advertising are disclosed. 2 3
The Skeptic
The employee-facing privacy policy is the one solid artefact: it lists exactly what is stored — down to social security number, next-of-kin contacts, availability and timestamps — states retention tied to the employer keeping the data plus legally required retention and limited backups, and says geofencing stores no location data. We found no public information on configurable role visibility, audit logs, deletion periods or any documentation offered for works-council approval, and third-party cookies for statistics and advertising appear on the pages with no mention of switching them off. 2 3
Payroll handoff & integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How planned and worked hours, surcharges and absences reach payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, the tax adviser — and how the roster connects to the POS, HR and time systems a shift business already runs.
0 — No payroll path and no integrations; the month leaves as a spreadsheet someone retypes.
3 — Generic CSV export said to suit payroll, with no named payroll system and no surcharge handling.
5 — A named payroll integration or documented export (e.g. DATEV Lohn und Gehalt or LODAS) covering hours, absences and surcharges, plus at least one named POS or HR integration.
8 — Vendor-maintained payroll integrations with a lock step before transmission, wage types mapped per surcharge, POS integrations feeding forecasting, an HR master-data sync, and a documented API.
10 — Payroll is designed for, not exported to: several named payroll systems maintained, retro corrections after the close handled, the tax adviser given scoped access, and a versioned public API with webhooks and a deprecation policy.
The Shift Manager
Time and attendance tracking is described as ensuring accurate payroll, and a developer portal exists, which hints at an API. But we found no public information on any named payroll system, a DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt export, surcharge and wage-type handling, or a single named POS or HR integration. The month's hours have a stated destination and no visible road. 2
The Operations Director
Time and attendance is positioned for accurate payroll and a developer portal exists, but we found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV or LODAS, no export format, no surcharge handling and no POS or HR integration. As far as the evidence goes, the payroll handoff is a sentence of intent. 2
The Payroll Officer
Time and attendance is explicitly positioned to guarantee accurate payroll, and a developer portal points to an integration path. We found no public information on a named payroll system — nothing on DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt — and nothing on wage types per surcharge, a lock step before transmission or retro corrections after the close, so the handoff is a claim rather than a documented export. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Time tracking is described as serving accurate payroll and a developer portal link exists, but we found no public information on any named payroll system, export format, surcharge handling, or POS and HR integrations, so a buyer cannot see how the month reaches the tax adviser. 2
The Frontline Employee
The only payroll-relevant evidence is time and attendance tracking described as ensuring accurate payroll, plus a developer portal whose contents the captured pages do not show. We found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV, wage-type or surcharge handling, or named POS and HR integrations, so the path from worked hours to the tax adviser stays unclear. 2
The Skeptic
Time and attendance is said to "eine genaue Gehaltsabrechnung gewährleisten", but no payroll system is ever named — no DATEV, no LODAS, no export format, no wage-type or surcharge mapping — and the only integration evidence on the captured pages is that a developer portal and a trust center exist as links. We found no public information on POS or HR integrations, a lock step before transmission, or what any API actually contains. 1 2
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the employee data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are, and whether that is documented rather than assumed. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted seriously here, because a scheduling tool holds availability, absence and often location data about employees who had no say in the vendor.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting region unstated or non-EU, subprocessors not named.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option or claimed without a provider, while the contracting entity is non-EU or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but the subprocessor chain (messaging, push notification, analytics, support) includes non-EU providers without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, EU contracting entity, full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing — push notification services included — named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, certification published, and a DPA that covers the employee data the app collects on personal devices.
The Shift Manager
The vendor is Swedish with a Hamburg-registered German subsidiary, so the contracting entities are European. But the captured pages state no hosting region, publish no subprocessor list — the privacy policy speaks only of approved subprocessors — and name no certification, and the captured pages give different figures for the Swedish supervisory authority (Datainspektionen and IMY). European letterhead, unverified data path. 3 4
The Operations Director
The imprint shows a Swedish parent company and a Hamburg-registered German subsidiary, so the contracting side of the chain sits in Europe. Beyond that nothing is documented: the captured pages state no hosting region, name no data-centre provider, and mention only 'approved subprocessors' without a list, so where employee data actually lives cannot be seen. 3 4
The Payroll Officer
The contracting picture is European: Quinyx AB headquartered in Sweden, a German subsidiary in Hamburg named in the legal notice, and a Swedish lead supervisory authority. We found no public information on the hosting region or the subprocessor chain — subprocessors appear only generically as "genehmigte Subprozessoren" — so where the availability, absence and time data physically sits is undocumented. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entities are European — Quinyx AB in Stockholm with a German subsidiary in Hamburg — but we found no public information on where employee data is hosted or which data-centre provider is used, and the privacy policy names only approved subprocessors without publishing them. The Trust Center appears as a link whose contents the captured pages do not show. 2 3 4
The Frontline Employee
The captured pages show a Swedish parent company and a German subsidiary in Hamburg as a contracting entity, both EU, but we found no public information on where employee data is hosted or which subprocessors sit behind messaging, push and analytics — the privacy policy names approved subprocessors without listing them. With hosting region and the subprocessor chain unpublished, the question of where my availability and absences physically live is unanswered. 2 3 4
The Skeptic
The vendor side is evidenced as European — copyright Quinyx AB, headquarters in Sweden with IMY as lead supervisory authority, and a German GmbH in the Hamburg commercial register — but the hosting region has no public information, and subprocessors are referenced only as "genehmigte Subprozessoren" without any being named, while third-party cookies for statistics and advertising hint at unnamed services in the chain. That is an EU vendor on paper with the rest of the chain dark. 2 3 4
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual invoice for their headcount and locations — including the time clock, payroll export, forecasting and other modules sold as add-ons — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A per-employee headline exists, but which features sit in which tier, the add-on modules, or a minimum seat or location count are unpriced or unmentioned.
5 — Per-employee or per-location prices public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed piece (time clock, payroll export, forecasting, terminal hardware) is an unpriced add-on.
8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with the per-employee maths, how inactive or seasonal staff are counted, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom work lacks a number.
10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table producing the annual invoice for a given headcount, location count and module selection, including hardware, onboarding and renewal terms.
The Shift Manager
The pricing link exists but the page carries no numbers: plans are described as tailored to the company and its goals, and you state your needs in a contact form and wait for the vendor to propose module options. Nothing is priced publicly, so no annual invoice for any headcount or location count can be computed from these pages. Every tier is a sales conversation. 1 2
The Operations Director
A pricing link exists but no price appears anywhere; the page itself says plans are tailored through a contact form with module options discussed in a follow-up conversation. A buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from these pages. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
The navigation carries a link labelled Preisgestaltung, but the page shows no figures; plans are assembled through a contact form and a tailored conversation over module options. Not even a per-employee headline is public, so no buyer can compute an annual invoice. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
A pricing link exists, but the page shows no concrete prices: plans are tailored and module options are proposed after a contact form. With no per-employee price, tier contents or add-on prices published, no buyer can compute an annual invoice from public pages. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
A pricing link exists but the page carries no figures; plans are described as tailored, the customer fills in a contact form, and the vendor responds with module options in a conversation. No per-employee price, billing period or add-on cost appears publicly, so a buyer can compute nothing from the pages alone. 1 2
The Skeptic
A nav link labelled "Preisgestaltung" exists, but the captured page carries no concrete prices; plans are "tailored" via a contact form, so every tier, module and seat count — including which tier holds the time clock or any payroll export, and how seasonal staff are counted — is a sales conversation. Nothing on the pages would let a buyer compute even a rough annual invoice. 1 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 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 | Incorporated in DE ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 5 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 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. This imprint covers only the German subsidiary Quinyx Germany GmbH, while the privacy page places the main establishment of parent Quinyx AB in Sweden.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. AWS is engaged via its EU contracting entity Amazon Web Services EMEA SARL with EU/EEA hosting regions, and the US-incorporated chat vendor Stream.io, Inc. applies only if Quinyx Messenger is part of the license.
- 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.
- 21 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
- 10 compliance 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
- 8 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
- 5 subprocessors 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 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
- 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 (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.quinyx.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.quinyx.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.quinyx.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice www.quinyx.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Security / trust page trust.quinyx.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap www.quinyx.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap www.quinyx.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap www.quinyx.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.quinyx.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.quinyx.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →