Forms & Surveys

Typeform

EU-Made 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 Typeform SL · www.typeform.com

An AI-assisted analysis of public evidence — not a hands-on test.

Every score, rationale and verdict on this page is AI-generated. Every claim cites the source it was read from. Nothing here is a human star review — and no score can be bought. How scores are made →

Method and versions

The Market Researcher v1.0 · The Operations Manager v1.0 · The HR Lead v1.0 · The Academic Researcher v1.0 · The Data Protection Officer v1.0 · The Skeptic v1.0 · rubric v1 · evaluated 29 Oct 2026

Compare with Tally → Compare with Jotform → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

HTML

<a href="https://whats-best.ai/software/forms-and-surveys/typeform"><img src="https://whats-best.ai/badge/forms-and-surveys/typeform.svg" alt="Typeform: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai" height="66"></a>

Markdown

[![Typeform: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai](https://whats-best.ai/badge/forms-and-surveys/typeform.svg)](https://whats-best.ai/software/forms-and-surveys/typeform)

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.

Typeform at a glance

Vendor: Typeform SL
Headquarters: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026
Data hosting: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026
Free plan: Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 28 Oct 2026
Panel verdict: The AI panel rates Typeform 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Typeform is a forms-and-surveys platform from Typeform SL of Barcelona, and the bench scores it highest on collection and workflows (6 to 7), crediting 28 question types, links, embeds, a 25,000-contact database with CSV import, file uploads, webhooks, a public API and Zapier. how scores are made
As of: Vendor pages captured 28 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 29 Oct 2026. all sources

Typeform 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	3.5 of 5
Survey analysis & reporting	2.5 of 5	2 of 5
Consent, GDPR & respondent data	3 of 5	3.5 of 5
Hosting choice, teams & portability	3 of 5	3 of 5
European sovereignty	3 of 5	3 of 5
Pricing transparency	3 of 5	3 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

The no-code drag-and-drop builder offers 28 question types, Logic Jump branching and a Workflow panel, piping via Recall Information, forms in multiple languages, video and signature questions, and a 3,000-plus template library with Brand Kit themes — enough for a competent questionnaire. For an ethics-board-grade instrument I also need item randomisation, hidden fields, calculations and scoring, and a named accessibility standard such as WCAG, and we found no public information on any of those, so it stays in the middle band. 2 3 8 13

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

Forms go out as links, email or website embeds, with file uploads, payments, partial responses, a 25,000-contact database with CSV import, automations triggered by contact changes or a scheduled date, follow-up emails and SMS, documented webhooks, a public API, and even built-in panel access for recruiting and screening study participants. We found no public information on reminder invitations with unique per-respondent links, response quotas with closing rules, or offline and kiosk collection, which is what would take it to the top band for panel studies. 3 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

Live reporting covers completion rates, question drop-off analysis, performance over time, auto-calculated NPS, shareable auto-generated reports, and AI detection of topics and sentiment in open answers, with a plain response download. The export format is never named, and we found no public information on cross-tabulation with significance testing, weighting, or SPSS or R exports with value labels — the very thing my statistical colleagues ask for — so it sits below the research-grade band. 3 10 11 13

Report an error

Consent, GDPR & respondent data

How this is scored

What the product gives the customer to collect personal data lawfully: consent and privacy-notice fields, anonymous surveys that really drop IP addresses and identifiers, retention periods and automatic deletion, handling of access and erasure requests, encryption of responses, a data processing agreement, and controls over cookies and tracking on the form itself.

0 — The product collects no personal data from respondents, so there is nothing to protect; or it is a different kind of product.

3 — A privacy policy and a statement of GDPR compliance, with a checkbox field usable for consent; anonymity, retention and deletion are not described.

5 — A data processing agreement offered to customers, a consent or privacy-notice field, an anonymous mode that does not store IP addresses, responses deletable by the customer, and encryption in transit and at rest stated.

8 — Retention periods with automatic deletion, tools for access and erasure requests per respondent, field-level encryption or masking of sensitive answers, forms that set no tracking cookies by default, a published list of technical and organisational measures, and a named data protection officer.

10 — Data protection by design and evidenced: end-to-end or customer-key encryption of responses, documented data minimisation defaults, a DPA with audit rights and subprocessor change notice, records of consent kept with each response, and an independent audit of the privacy controls published.

Report an error

The Academic Researcher

Unusually well documented for an ethics submission: a published DPA with Typeform as processor, a named Data Protection Officer, the Spanish Data Protection Authority as supervisory body, AES-256 at rest and TLS 1.2 or higher in transit, technical and organisational measures in the DPA annex, breach notification within GDPR deadlines, and surveys that are anonymous by default and collect no IP addresses so long as no identifying fields or URL tracking parameters are used. Cookie consent needs an Axeptio widget that requires a PRO+ account plus a separate Axeptio account, and we found no public information on field-level masking of sensitive answers, configurable per-survey retention with automatic deletion, or consent records stored with each response. 4 5 12 13

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 information is processed from the European Economic Area, and an EU or US data centre can be chosen — but only on Enterprise, the same tier that gates SSO and a custom domain; shared workspaces with roles, real-time collaboration, branding removal on paid plans, custom subdomains and response download with a public API complete a solid mid-level picture. For faculty self-administration I would want a self-hosted edition, granular per-form permissions, SAML and provisioning detail, and a documented importable export format, and we found no public information on those. 2 3 4 7

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 contracting entity is Typeform SL of Barcelona with a Spanish tax ID, the DPA is governed by Spanish law with the Spanish Data Protection Agency as authority, and SOC 2 Type II plus ISO/IEC 27001 and further certifications are published. However, the pricing pages locate customer data in AWS — a US-headquartered host — the EU data centre choice exists only on Enterprise, the full subprocessor list sits behind a help-centre link while named processors include a San Francisco affiliate, so an EU-resident chain end to end is not evidenced. 3 4 5 6

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

Four plans carry public prices — 25 EUR / mo Basic, 49 EUR / mo Plus, 84 EUR / mo Business, and 242EUR/mo after 14 days for Growth Flow with a credit card required — alongside a comparison table of included and maximum responses, users, file-upload and video limits, yearly billing labelled Save 30%, priced automation add-ons, non-refundable fees and a documented hard stop when response limits are reached. Enterprise, which gates SSO, HIPAA and the EU data centre choice, is contact sales only, and we found no public information on VAT treatment or the price of additional responses, so a university buyer cannot compute the full annual cost from public pages alone. 3 6 7 11

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.

Legal entity	Not determined ⚠ unverified	—	uncited Report an error
Hosting location	Not determined ⚠ unverified	—	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 ⚠ unverified	—	uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment	Not determined	—	uncited Report an error

Questions about Typeform

Is Typeform European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Typeform as EU-Made.

Where does Typeform store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026.

Does Typeform have a free plan?

Yes. Typeform has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 28 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Typeform?

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: Typeform alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 28 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
Weak sourcing — Open source, Legal entity, Hosting location, Hosting options, Data processing agreement. 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.

46 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
9 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
3 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
2 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
2 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
2 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
1 data fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
5 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are 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

Do you know more about Typeform? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (13)

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

1 Vendor homepage www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
2 Features page (surveys) www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
3 Pricing page www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
4 Privacy policy www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
5 Data processing agreement www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
6 Legal notice www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
7 Terms of service www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
8 Distribution, response collection & workflows — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
9 Distribution, response collection & workflows — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
10 Survey analysis & reporting — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
11 Survey analysis & reporting — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
12 Consent, GDPR & respondent data — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
13 Consent, GDPR & respondent data — found from sitemap www.typeform.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →