HR Management
KiwiHR
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by KiwiHR GmbH · www.kiwihr.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.
KiwiHR at a glance
- Vendor
- KiwiHR GmbH
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates KiwiHR 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. KiwiHR, from KiwiHR GmbH, sold on the captured pages within the Tellent HR suite, is strongest on payroll readiness and time and absence, both at 7 with no spread: a maintained DATEV connection into LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt carries variable salary components, returns payslips to distribute, and backs pay runs with approver and review step, while leave balances calculate automatically with regional holidays counted into entitlement and the German time-recording duty is stated as met. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
KiwiHR, from KiwiHR GmbH, sold on the captured pages within the Tellent HR suite, is strongest on payroll readiness and time and absence, both at 7 with no spread: a maintained DATEV connection into LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt carries variable salary components, returns payslips to distribute, and backs pay runs with approver and review step, while leave balances calculate automatically with regional holidays counted into entitlement and the German time-recording duty is stated as met. Recruiting and onboarding land at 4 — the applicant tracking system is sold as a separately branded add-on beside journey templates, with no public information on a candidate-to-employee handover without re-entry. Weakest are sovereignty at 2 to 3 and employee data governance at 3 to 4: the only captured European statement concerns development origin, no public information appears on hosting location or subprocessors, and employee data remains visible until the employee is manually deleted. No category split the judges by more than a point; the only public cost facts are a free trial, a demo, and implementation stated as free in a few hours.
Speaks for it
- Payroll hands off through a maintained DATEV connection into LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt, with payslips imported back and distributed to employees
- Leave balances calculate automatically with regional holidays counted into the entitlement, with one-click exports of balances and absences
- Time capture runs by app or multi-location clock station with automatic overtime calculation, and the vendor states the German time-recording duty is met
- Access permissions are configurable per profile section, with a change history showing who edited profile data
- Implementation is stated as free of charge and to take only a few hours
Held against it
- Recruiting and onboarding score 4, with the applicant tracking system sold as a separately branded add-on and no public information on a candidate-to-employee handover without re-entry
- Employee data remains visible until the employee is manually deleted, with no public information on retention periods per data category
- Sovereignty scores 2 to 3, with the only captured European statement covering development origin and no public information on hosting location or subprocessors
- The Timeboard shows in real time who is currently working, and no public information appears on limits to that presence view
- Core HR records score 5 to 6, with no public information on effective-dated contract versions or org structures across multiple entities and cost centres
Best for
- You run payroll on DATEV and want a documented handoff into LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt with payslips flowing back to employees
- You need German working-time and absence tracking, with regional holidays folded into the entitlement and the time-recording duty covered
- Your team wants a mid-weight digital personnel file with per-section access permissions and employee self-service
Avoid if
- You need recruitment and onboarding as one connected path from candidate to employee record without re-entry
- Your procurement requires a stated hosting location and subprocessor disclosure before signing
- You need automatic, rule-based retention and deletion of employee data by category
- A works council must approve monitoring tools and will scrutinise a real-time presence view
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Digital personnel file & data model | 3 of 5 |
| Payroll handoff | 3.5 of 5 |
| Absence & working-time | 3.5 of 5 |
| Recruiting & onboarding | 2 of 5 |
| Employee data protection & co-determination | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
Digital personnel file & data model
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The system of record: employee master data, the digital personnel file, org structure, custom fields, and whether history is kept rather than overwritten.
0 — A contact list with job titles; no document storage, no org structure, no history — changes overwrite what was there.
3 — Employee records with document upload, but a flat structure: no org chart, few or no custom fields, and no dated history of contract or salary changes.
5 — Digital personnel file with structured document types, an org chart, custom fields, and change history on the core employment fields.
8 — Complete record: versioned contract and compensation history with effective dates, document templates with e-signature, org structure supporting multiple entities and cost centres, and granular field-level permissions.
10 — The file is the single source of truth an auditor could work from: full effective-dated history on every field, retention rules per document type, delegated administration per entity, and export that reproduces the record intact.
The People Lead
The digital personnel file is real: document management, an org chart, public and private profile areas, custom modules for things like access cards and trainings, per-section access with a record of who changed profile data, plus a salary history overview. That is a solid middle score; I found no public information on effective-dated versioning of contract and compensation changes, e-signature document templates, org structure across multiple entities and cost centres, or field-level permissions. 1 2 3 4
The Payroll Officer
The digital personnel file, organisation chart, document management and a public/private profile split are evidenced, the help pages show who changed which profile data, and per-section lock icons mark who may read or edit. We found no public information on effective-dated contract and compensation versions, retention rules per document type, e-signature document templates or multi-entity org structure, so this reads as a solid mid-level file rather than a complete record. 2 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The file is real: documents and contracts stored, an org chart, public and private profile areas, per-section lock icons showing who may read or edit, and profile change history showing who altered what. The captured pages do not show effective-dated contract and salary versions, e-signature on documents, or multi-entity structures with cost centres, so it stays at the solid-file level rather than the complete record. 1 2 3
The Data Protection Officer
The digital personnel file is evidenced in substance: public and private profile areas, document and contract storage with integrated document management, an org chart, per-section access permissions shown by lock icons, and attribution of who changed profile data. Salary histories are offered as an overview, but we found no public information on effective-dated versioning of contract and compensation changes, retention rules per document type, or multi-entity and cost-centre structures, which keeps this short of the complete record. 1 2 3 4
The IT Integrator
The personnel file is real: document management, an org chart, custom modules for things like access cards and trainings, contracts stored in a private profile area, and a change log showing who edited profile data, with per-section read and edit permissions indicated by lock icons. What I want before making an HR system the source of truth for accounts — effective-dated contract and compensation versions, field-level permissions, multi-entity org structures — I found no public information on, beyond a salary overview and history. 2 3 4
The Skeptic
A digital personnel file, document management, an org chart and custom modules are evidenced, and each profile section carries a lock icon with a settings path for read and edit permissions. I stay at the mid mark because the only change history shown is that you can see who edited a profile, and while a salary history overview appears on the payroll page, we found no public information on effective-dated contract versions, document templates with e-signature, or org structures across multiple entities and cost centres. 2 3 4
Payroll handoff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the month closes cleanly into payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, an in-house system or an external tax adviser — and how much of that is automated rather than re-typed.
0 — No payroll path stated at all; whatever leaves the system leaves as a spreadsheet somebody retypes.
3 — Generic CSV export said to be usable for payroll, with no named payroll system, no defined format and no handling of mid-month changes.
5 — A named payroll integration or a documented export format for at least one major system (e.g. DATEV LODAS/Lohn und Gehalt), covering the recurring monthly fields.
8 — Certified or vendor-maintained integration with a named payroll provider, covering variable pay, absences and mid-month joiners and leavers, with a documented pre-payroll check.
10 — Payroll is a first-class part of the product: maintained bidirectional integrations with several named systems, an auditable approval and lock step before transmission, retro-accounting for backdated changes, and the tax adviser given their own access.
The People Lead
This is the strongest part: a documented DATEV connection into both LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt with files sent directly, payslips imported back and distributed to employees, variable salary components transferred, and even the eAU wage exchange service; pay runs carry an approver and a review step, and absences show up in the payroll module. I found no public information on certification, mid-month joiner and leaver handling, or dedicated tax-adviser access, so I stop below the top band. 4 5 6
The Payroll Officer
This is the strongest part of the captured pages: a documented DATEV link into both LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt with files sent directly to the DATEV instance, variable salary components included, payslips imported back and distributed, a wage exchange data service for eAU, and multiple named connections. Pay runs carry a pay period, payment date and approver with a pay-run review, which reads as a genuine pre-payroll check; what we found no public information on is mid-month joiners and leavers, retro-accounting for backdated changes, and certification by the payroll provider — exactly the things that decide whether the month closes clean. 4 5 6 7
The Works Council Advocate
The month closes into named systems: files go directly to DATEV LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt, variable salary components transfer, absences surface in the payroll module, and pay runs are created with period, payment date, an approver and a pay-run review. Mid-month joiners and leavers, retro-accounting and any certification of the DATEV connection are not documented in what we captured, which keeps it below the top band. 4 5 6
The Data Protection Officer
The DATEV handoff is documented in working detail: target systems Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS, direct sending of files, transfer of variable salary components, payslips imported from DATEV and distributed to employees, and pay runs with approver, payment date and a pay run review. Absences surface in the payroll module view and time data flows into the payroll export. We found no public information on handling of mid-month joiners and leavers, a certification for the integration, or retro-accounting of backdated changes. 4 5 6 7
The IT Integrator
DATEV is a maintained path rather than a retyped spreadsheet: target selection between LODAS and Lohn und Gehalt, direct transmission, variable salary components, eAU wage exchange services, payslips flowing back for distribution, and pay runs carrying an approver and a review step. I found no public information on mid-month joiners and leavers, retro-accounting for backdated changes, or the tax adviser getting their own access. 4 5 6
The Skeptic
The DATEV connection is a maintained integration rather than a bare export format: you choose LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt, send files directly to the DATEV instance, pull payslips back and distribute them, and variable salary components transfer too. What keeps it short of the top marks is that we found no public information on mid-month joiners and leavers, retro-accounting, or the tax adviser getting their own access; the closest to a pre-payroll check is a pay run review plus data change alerts, and no certification is claimed anywhere in the captured material. 4 5 6 7
Absence & working-time
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Vacation, sickness and working-time recording — including whether the product meets the German recording duty (BAG 2022, ArbZG) rather than merely offering a timer.
0 — No absence or time handling; both live in a spreadsheet elsewhere.
3 — Vacation requests with an approval step, but entitlement is manual, carry-over is not handled and there is no working-time recording.
5 — Automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, an absence calendar, and basic working-time capture with a report per employee.
8 — Configurable per country and contract: pro-rata entitlement, public-holiday calendars per location, break and rest-period rules, overtime accounts, and an export the employer can hand to a labour inspection.
10 — Working-time recording built as a legal obligation rather than a feature: tamper-evident records, documented compliance with the ArbZG recording duty, works-council-configurable monitoring limits, and shift or on-call models handled without add-ons.
The People Lead
Leave balances calculate automatically with regional holidays counted into the entitlement, sick days are tracked, there is a shared calendar and one-click exports, and working time is captured against individual models with automatic overtime, app and station clock, with the pages stating the German time-recording duty is met. I found no public information on pro-rata entitlement, break and rest-period rules, or tamper-evident records, so this lands above the middle on the strength of the entitlement and working-time capture. 1 6 7
The Payroll Officer
Leave balances calculate automatically with regional holidays folded into the entitlement, sickness and overtime are captured centrally with individual working-time models and an app, and the vendor explicitly claims the German time-recording duty is met. Those compliance claims sit at marketing level: we found no public information on carry-over rules, rest-period and break rule enforcement, tamper-evidence of records, or an export framed for a labour inspection. 6 7
The Works Council Advocate
Entitlement and balances calculate automatically, regional holidays are counted in, sick days and overtime are captured with individual working-time models, app self-capture and timesheets, and the vendor states the German time-recording duty is fulfilled. But the Timeboard shows in real time who is currently working, and I found no public information on whether that presence view can be limited, on tamper-evident records, or on break and rest-period rules — for a works council that silence matters. 1 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
Balances calculate automatically, regional holidays flow into entitlement, absence types are customizable, overtime is computed automatically, and employees capture hours and breaks themselves by app or time clock, with exports of balances and monthly absences. The pages state the product fulfils the German time-recording duty ("Erfüllen Sie die Zeiterfassungspflicht in Deutschland sicher und einfach"). We found no public information on pro-rata entitlement per contract, break and rest-period rules, tamper-evident records, or monitoring limits a works council could configure. 1 6 7
The IT Integrator
Automatic balances with regional holidays computed into entitlement, sick days tracked centrally, customizable absence types, individual working-time models with automatic overtime, capture by app or a multi-role multi-location time clock, and a page explicitly aimed at the German time-recording duty. For pro-rata entitlement, rest-period rules and tamper-evidence for a labour inspection, I found no public information. 1 6 7
The Skeptic
Both halves are real products: automatic balances with regional holidays factored into entitlement, customizable absence types, a shared calendar, and time capture by app or clock station with overtime, breaks and sick days calculated centrally — plus an explicit claim to meet the German time-recording duty and one-click exports of balances and absences. I stop short of the top marks because the captured pages give nothing on tamper-evident records, configurable break and rest-period rules, or monitoring limits a works council could set. 6 7
Recruiting & onboarding
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The join path — vacancy to signed contract to a person who has an account, equipment and a plan on day one.
0 — Neither applicant tracking nor onboarding exists; hiring happens in a shared inbox.
3 — A basic applicant list with statuses, or an onboarding checklist — one of the two, without the handover between them.
5 — Applicant tracking with a careers page, structured stages and rejection handling, plus a checklist-driven onboarding that carries the hired candidate over into an employee record without re-entry.
8 — Multi-posting to named job boards, interview scheduling and scorecards, GDPR-conscious applicant retention and deletion, e-signed contracts, and onboarding that triggers tasks in IT and payroll.
10 — The whole join is one governed flow: approval-gated requisitions with budget, structured and bias-conscious evaluation, automated applicant deletion at the stated deadline, and provisioning driven from the record so day one needs no HR intervention.
The People Lead
An ATS exists as an add-on with recruiting-team permissions and full admin oversight, and onboarding runs through templated employee journeys from pre-boarding to compliance training and offboarding. I found no public information on a careers page, structured stages, rejection handling, or the candidate-to-employee handover without re-entry, so the two halves are not evidenced as one connected join path. 1 6 8
The Payroll Officer
An ATS module is offered alongside automated journey templates covering pre-onboarding through offboarding, and the recruiting-team article confirms jobs, candidates, and role-based access to them. Beyond that we found no public information on careers pages, structured stages and rejection handling, e-signed contracts, or the handover that carries a hired candidate into an employee record without re-entry. 1 8
The Works Council Advocate
An ATS exists as an add-on and onboarding runs through automated journey templates covering pre-boarding, compliance training and offboarding, with recruiting-team access governed per vacancy and admins always seeing everything. We found no public information on a careers page, structured stages or scorecards, e-signed contracts, applicant retention and deletion, or the handover of a hired candidate into the employee record without re-entry. 1 8
The Data Protection Officer
An applicant tracking system is offered as an add-on module within the suite, with recruiting-team access controls, admin oversight of every vacancy and candidate, and automated journey templates covering pre-onboarding through offboarding. We found no public information on applicant stages, a careers page, rejection handling, the carry-over of a hired candidate into an employee record, or — the item I weigh hardest — retention periods and automatic deletion of applicant data at a stated deadline. 1 6 8
The IT Integrator
The join path is split in two: an ATS sold as an add-on module whose captured documentation covers recruiting-team invitations and admin access, and onboarding as journey templates running from pre-boarding to offboarding. My test of onboarding is whether it creates the account, and I found no public information on the candidate-to-employee handover or on single sign-on, directory sync or any IT provisioning driven from the record. 1 2 8
The Skeptic
The join path is assembled from separately branded pieces: an ATS sold as an add-on under the Recruitee name, whose captured help pages document team permissions and email placeholders rather than a careers page, structured stages or rejection handling, alongside journey templates that do name pre-onboarding and offboarding. We found no public information on the handover that turns a hired candidate into an employee record without re-entry, on applicant retention and deletion deadlines, or on e-signed contracts. 1 2 8
Employee data protection & co-determination
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product handles the most sensitive personal data a company holds — retention, deletion, role separation, subject rights — and whether it can pass a works council (BetrVG §87) rather than merely a procurement checklist.
0 — No stated retention or deletion handling, no role model beyond admin-or-not, and no DPA offered on the site.
3 — A DPA exists on request and roles are coarse; retention and deletion are described as something the customer arranges themselves.
5 — A signable DPA is published, roles are configurable per module, applicant and employee retention periods are stated, and deletion can be executed rather than only promised.
8 — Field-level access control with an audit log of who read what, configurable retention per data category with automatic deletion, documented subject-rights support, and monitoring or analytics features that can be switched off for co-determination.
10 — Built for the works council to say yes: published processing documentation and subprocessor list, per-entity data separation, tamper-evident audit trail, evaluation and behavioural-analysis features off by default with their scope documented, and a data-protection impact assessment the customer can build on.
The People Lead
Access rights are configurable with per-section lock indicators, there is a change trail showing who edited profile data, and a Trust Center and GDPR-compliance claims sit on the site; but retention is my manual job, since employee data stays visible until the person is manually deleted. I found no public information on a published signable data processing agreement, stated retention periods per data category, or an audit log of who read what, which is exactly what a works council will ask me for. 2 3 7
The Payroll Officer
Access permissions are configurable with per-section lock icons, profile changes show who made them, and a trust centre is offered — but employee data stays visible until someone manually deletes it, so retention and deletion are the customer's job rather than the product's. We found no public information on a published signable DPA, stated retention periods with automatic deletion, an audit log of who read what, or monitoring defaults a works council could review. 2 3 7
The Works Council Advocate
Access rights are configurable per section and profile changes show who made them, which is a start; but deletion is manual, the stated retention is that employee data remains visible until the person is manually deleted, and I found no public information on a published data-processing agreement, on any log of who read what, or on switching off the presence dashboard and reporting. On this evidence I could not steer a works council to yes. 2 3 7
The Data Protection Officer
Retention is stated as an entirely manual act — employee data remains visible until the employee is manually deleted — so deletion executes only if someone remembers to act. Per-section access permissions, change attribution and a Trust Center are the bright spots, but we found no public information on a signable data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, an audit log of who read what, subject-rights support, or co-determination-friendly settings for the presence timeboard and reports. 2 3 4 7
The IT Integrator
Deletion is described as manual — employee data stays visible until the employee is deleted by hand — and I found no public information on a published data-processing agreement, stated retention periods, or an audit log of who read what; the change log records who edited, not who viewed. Configurable read and edit permissions per profile section and anonymized whistleblowing reports are the bright spots. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
Deletion can be executed and access is configurable per profile section, but retention runs the other way: employee data stays visible until someone manually deletes it, and no retention periods per data category are stated. We found no public information on a published DPA, an audit log of who read what, subject-rights support, or automatic deletion — the GDPR wording on the marketing pages is an assertion, and the Trust Center pointer names no contents. 2 3 4 7
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are, and whether the answer is documented rather than assumed. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as the buyer would weigh it.
0 — US-headquartered vendor, US contracting entity, hosting region unstated or US, subprocessors not named.
3 — EU hosting is offered as an option but the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is incomplete or absent.
5 — EU hosting stated as standard and an EU contracting entity, but the subprocessor chain includes non-EU providers without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, an EU contracting entity, the full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, contracting entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, certification of the data centres published, and an on-premises or private-cloud option for buyers who need it.
The People Lead
The only signals I can find are "developed in Europe, built to European standards" and the vendor's German entity; I found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity behind the Tellent-branded pages, or any subprocessor list. For 400 people's most sensitive data that is an assumption I would have to verify before signing, so this scores low. 6 7
The Payroll Officer
The only European statement is that the product was developed in Europe to European standards — a claim about where the code was written, not where employee data is processed. We found no public information on hosting region, the contracting entity, a named data-centre provider, or a published subprocessor list. 6 7
The Works Council Advocate
Beyond the claim of being developed in Europe to European standards and a Trust Center link, we found no public information on where data is hosted, on confirmation of the contracting entity's location, or on a single named subprocessor. For a Betriebsrat, that is not an answer to the question of where our people's data lives. 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
The pages claim "In Europa entwickelt. Nach europäischen Standards gebaut." and the contracting entity is a German GmbH. We found no public information on where the data is hosted, the data-centre provider, certifications, or any subprocessor list, and the site markets a Tellent product family whose processing chain the buyer must establish for itself. 1 6 7
The IT Integrator
The only signal is "developed in Europe, built to European standards," which says nothing about where data is hosted, who the contracting entity is, or any subprocessor; the independently sourced sovereignty record is empty. I found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider or a published subprocessor list. 6 7
The Skeptic
The only statements captured are 'developed in Europe, built to European standards' and a Trust Center link, and development origin is not hosting. No captured page states where data is hosted, names a single subprocessor, or confirms the contracting entity — the pages speak as Tellent while the vendor of record is a German GmbH — so on hosting and the processing chain we found no public information to score against. 1 6 7
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether an HR lead can compute the real annual invoice for their headcount — including the modules they actually need — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — An entry price per employee exists, but the modules most buyers need are unpriced, or a minimum headcount, setup fee or mandatory onboarding package is not stated publicly.
5 — Per-employee prices are public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed module (payroll, time, recruiting) hides in an unpriced bundle.
8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with per-employee maths, billing period, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom enterprise work lacks a number.
10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table that produces the annual invoice for a given headcount and module selection, including setup, minimums and renewal terms.
The People Lead
The only public cost statements are a free trial, a free demo and an implementation described as free of charge; I found no public information on any per-employee price, tier or module price, so I cannot compute an annual invoice for my headcount from the pages alone. 1 4 7
The Payroll Officer
No price figure appears in the captured pages: we found no public information on per-employee pricing, tiers, billing period, minimum term or VAT treatment. The only cost-related facts are a free trial and that implementation is free of charge and takes a few hours — nothing from which an annual invoice could be computed. 1 4 7
The Works Council Advocate
No price figure appears anywhere in the captured material — only a free trial, a demo, and the statement that implementation is free and takes a few hours. An HR lead cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from these pages. 1 4 7
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public prices at all: no per-employee rate, no tiers, and no billing period stated; the pages offer a free trial, a demo, and the statement that implementation takes a few hours and is free. An HR lead cannot compute an annual invoice for their headcount from these pages. 1 4 7
The IT Integrator
Public pages show a free trial, a demo button and free implementation in a few hours, but I found no public prices at all — no per-employee rate, no tiers, and no numbers for the ATS or performance add-on modules. An HR lead cannot compute even a rough annual invoice from what is published. 1 4 7
The Skeptic
A buyer can learn that the trial is free and that implementation is stated as free and takes a few hours, and that is the entirety of public price information in the captured material. We found no public information on per-employee prices, tiers, billing periods, or what the ATS and performance add-ons cost; the captured journey ends at a free trial and a demo request. 1 4 7
Questions about KiwiHR
Is KiwiHR European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where KiwiHR is based.
Where does KiwiHR store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does KiwiHR have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to KiwiHR?
As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates rexx systems (3.5/5), HRworks (3/5) and Kenjo (3/5) highest among the other 30 HR Management 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 rexx systems (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: KiwiHR alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- 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.
- 10 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
- 2 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 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
- 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
- 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 (8)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.kiwihr.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Digital personnel file & data model — found from sitemap tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Digital personnel file & data model — found from sitemap support.tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap support.tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Absence & working-time — found from sitemap tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Absence & working-time — found from sitemap tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Recruiting & onboarding — found from sitemap support.tellent.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →