whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Forms & Surveys

involve.me

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 involve.me GmbH · www.involve.me

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

Link to this page

involve.me: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai involve.me: 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.

involve.me at a glance

Vendor
involve.me GmbH
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
Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 3 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates involve.me 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. involve.me, operated by stereosense GmbH of Vienna, builds quizzes, calculators and surveys with a built-in CRM and email automation. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources

involve.me alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Academic Researcher

Weighted verdict

Runs questionnaire studies at a European university and has to satisfy the ethics board before the first respondent sees a question. Wants complex branching, randomisation and validated scales, an informed-consent page that is part of the instrument, exports to SPSS and R with labels intact, and a licence the faculty can host or at least keep in the EU.

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

Scored by The Academic Researcher

Panel median The Academic Researcher 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 Academic Researcher
Form & survey building 3 of 5 3 of 5
Distribution, response collection & workflows 3.5 of 5 3 of 5
Survey analysis & reporting 2.5 of 5 2.5 of 5
Consent, GDPR & respondent data 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Hosting choice, teams & portability 3 of 5 3 of 5
European sovereignty 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Pricing transparency 2 of 5 2 of 5

Form & survey building

How this is scored

What can be built without code: question and field types, conditional logic and branching, piping and hidden fields, calculations, multi-page forms and progress, templates, design and branding, multiple languages, and accessible output for respondents.

0 — Not a form or survey builder; questions cannot be authored in the product.

3 — A builder with the common question types and a few templates; logic, branding or languages are basic or not described.

5 — A drag-and-drop builder with a wide range of question types, conditional logic that shows, hides or skips questions, multi-page forms, a template library, and the customer's logo, colours and fonts.

8 — Advanced logic with piping, hidden fields, calculations and scoring, randomisation, surveys translated into several languages from one master, reusable question libraries, custom CSS or themes, and accessible forms with a named standard (WCAG 2.1 AA or BITV) stated.

10 — Best-in-class authoring: complex research designs (loops, quotas in logic, conjoint or MaxDiff), versioned forms with change history, a published accessibility conformance report, and every element of a form available through the API.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

A drag-and-drop editor with more than fifty elements, 55+ templates, conditional outcome pages, a formula builder with nested IF/THEN and VLOOKUP, hidden fields carried through embed parameters, and randomly split A/B paths covers most of what a questionnaire needs, and the Opt-In Checkbox element can double as an in-instrument consent page. I found no public information on surveys in several languages from one master, a stated accessibility standard, reusable question libraries or custom CSS, so it stops short of research-grade authoring. 1 5 6 7 8 12

Report an error

Distribution, response collection & workflows

How this is scored

How forms reach people and what happens to an answer: share links, embedding, QR codes, email invitations with reminders, contact lists and panels, offline or kiosk collection, file uploads, payments and signatures inside the form, notifications, approval or assignment of submissions, and automations that pass a response on to other tools.

0 — No way to collect responses from other people; the product only analyses data collected elsewhere.

3 — A share link and an embed code, with responses visible in the product; invitations, notifications and onward workflows are basic or not described.

5 — Links, embedding and QR codes, email notifications on submission, file uploads, a few native integrations (spreadsheets, CRM, chat) plus a connector service such as Zapier or Make, and either email invitations with reminders or payments inside the form.

8 — Invitations to managed contact lists with reminders and unique links, response quotas and closing rules, offline or kiosk collection, submissions routed for approval or assignment, conditional notifications, documented webhooks and a REST API to read and write responses.

10 — Collection at research and process scale: panel or sample sourcing, multi-channel distribution (email, SMS, web, app intercept) with deduplication, workflows with branching and audit trail, and every response event exposed to the customer's systems in real time with a stated delivery guarantee.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

Distribution and onward processing are genuinely strong: share links, embedding and QR codes, email invitations from the Start plan, in-form payments, file attachments, 50+ native integrations plus Zapier and webhooks, and a workflow engine with six triggers, branching on answers and scores, waits, assignments and random splits. I found no public information on unique one-time links with reminders, response quotas or closing rules, offline or kiosk collection, or a REST API to read responses. 5 7 8 11

Report an error

Survey analysis & reporting

How this is scored

What the product does with the answers: live results and charts, filters and segments, cross-tabulation, NPS, CSAT and other standard scores, open-text and sentiment analysis, shareable dashboards and reports, and exports to the formats analysts use (CSV, Excel, SPSS, R).

0 — No view of results inside the product; submissions can only be forwarded or downloaded one at a time.

3 — A table of responses with simple charts per question and a CSV export; filters, comparisons and report sharing are basic or not described.

5 — Charts per question, filters and segments, at least one comparison or cross-tab view, standard scores such as NPS, shareable or exportable reports (PDF, presentation), and exports to CSV and Excel.

8 — Cross-tabulation with significance testing, weighting, open-text coding or sentiment analysis, trend reports across survey waves, dashboards for different audiences with permissions, and SPSS or R exports with labels.

10 — A research-grade analysis environment: statistical models beyond cross-tabs (driver analysis, regression), benchmarks, text analytics with themes the customer can edit, and every analysis reproducible from documented exports or an analytics API.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

The analytics give visits, submissions, completion rate, average score, a 30-day trend, drop-off and device and country breakdowns, saved segments with stacked AND/OR filters, and XLS and CSV exports — with the detailed metrics gated to the top Scale plan. For a research workflow this is the weak spot: I found no public information on cross-tabulation with significance testing, weighting, shareable report dashboards, or SPSS and R exports with labels, and open-text handling appears as AI-generated summaries of open-ended answers. 6 9 10

Report an error

Hosting choice, teams & portability

How this is scored

What the customer may choose about where and how the product runs and who uses it: a selectable data region or EU-only hosting, self-hosting or an on-premise edition, team workspaces with roles and permissions, single sign-on, an audit log, custom domains and white-labelling, and a complete export of forms and responses that another tool can import.

0 — A single-user tool with no export of forms or responses.

3 — Shared access for a team and a response export; data location, roles and single sign-on are not described.

5 — Hosting location stated with an EU option, team workspaces with at least two roles, single sign-on on a higher plan, a custom domain or removed vendor branding, and an export of all responses.

8 — EU-only hosting selectable per account or a self-hosted edition, granular roles per form or folder, SSO with SAML and user provisioning, an audit log, white-labelling, and forms and responses exportable in a documented format with an API.

10 — Full control over operation: an open-source or on-premise edition with feature parity, customer-chosen region per workspace, administrative APIs, a documented migration path in and out, and an uptime commitment with a published status history.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

The privacy policy states data is primarily processed and stored within the EU, custom domains with SSL plus footer removal give white-labelling from Grow upward, organizations carry team members and assignees, responses export to XLS and CSV, and SAML2 single sign-on with domain enforcement and just-in-time account creation exists — but only on a bespoke Enterprise plan requiring vendor-side enablement. All pages stay hosted on the vendor's servers with nothing published to the customer's own, and I found no public information on a selectable data region, an audit log, granular per-form roles, or an API-based export of the forms themselves. 3 8 13 14

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where forms and responses are hosted, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, email delivery, payment providers, analytics, AI features). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; responses often carry personal and sometimes special-category data, so the whole chain counts, not only the database.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.

3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.

5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (email, analytics, AI features, support) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

The operator is stereosense GmbH of Vienna with a commercial register number and Austrian VAT ID, the core infrastructure is stated to sit in the EU, breaches go to the Austrian data protection authority within 72 hours, the DPA is published, SCCs and transfer impact assessments are in place, and a SOC 2 Type II audit is claimed. The captured pages name only Stripe in the United States and Reditus in the Netherlands as subprocessors, the underlying hosting provider is not named, and there is no complete list covering email delivery or AI features, so the chain is not evidenced end to end. 2 3 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per plan and per user, response or submission limits and what happens above them, which features (logic, branding removal, SSO, EU hosting, analysis modules) need a higher plan, add-ons, minimum term and the free tier's limits.

0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.

3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with users, responses or features is unclear.

5 — Plans are public with prices and their main limits (users, responses, forms), but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, EU hosting, extra responses, branding removal) is unpriced or "on request".

8 — Every plan priced publicly with its limits, overage or extra-response prices, feature differences per plan in a comparison table, billing period, VAT treatment and cancellation terms stated.

10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of users, responses and features, with every add-on, enterprise option, support level and data-return term published.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

A free tier without credit card and a paid entry point of "$29/month annual" are public, the help pages map many gates — exports from Start, footer removal and custom domains from Grow, detailed metrics and configurable retention from Scale, single sign-on only on a bespoke Enterprise contract — and the custom-domain add-on is priced exactly at "$10/€9 per month or $100/€90 per year". I found no public information on the individual prices of the Start, Grow and Scale plans, the plan-dependent email limits, overage pricing, VAT treatment or cancellation terms, so a faculty cannot compute its real annual cost from these pages alone. 1 8 9 12 13 14

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 6 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.

Hosting location Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Hosting options Not determined — uncited Report an error
Open source Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data processing agreement Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about involve.me

Is involve.me European?

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

Where does involve.me store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

Does involve.me have a free plan?

Yes. involve.me has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 3 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to involve.me?

As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Formbricks (4/5), easyfeedback (3.5/5) and Netigate (3.5/5) highest among the other 19 Forms & Surveys 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 Formbricks (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: involve.me 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 involve.me? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (14)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Imprint — found from the homepage www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy — found from the homepage www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Data processing agreement (dpa) — found from the homepage www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Form & survey building — found from sitemap www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Form & survey building — found from sitemap www.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Distribution, response collection & workflows — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Distribution, response collection & workflows — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Survey analysis & reporting — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Survey analysis & reporting — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Consent, GDPR & respondent data — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Consent, GDPR & respondent data — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Hosting choice, teams & portability — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Hosting choice, teams & portability — found from sitemap help.involve.me Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →