IT Service Management
Matrix42 Service Management
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Matrix42 GmbH · www.matrix42.com
Compare with ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus → 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.
Matrix42 Service Management at a glance
- Vendor
- Matrix42 GmbH
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Matrix42 Service Management 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Matrix42 Service Management scores 7 on assets and CMDB and 6 on change and problem management, against 4 on service desk; no criterion's scores spread by more than a point. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources
Matrix42 Service Management alternatives, European ones first →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Matrix42 Service Management scores 7 on assets and CMDB and 6 on change and problem management, against 4 on service desk; no criterion's scores spread by more than a point. The asset side is the deepest documented — agentless discovery through data providers and a data gateway, Active Directory, Windows and Unix inventory with SQL, Exchange and SharePoint editions, VMware vCenter, Hyper-V and Citrix XenServer sources, licence requirement analysis, and a CMDB of configuration items with dependency maps. Change management follows ITIL with standard, non-standard and emergency changes, ECAB emergency approval and known-error flags. Service desk trails: we found no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, queues, or volume and resolution-time reporting. The self-service portal (4 to 5) needs the separately licensed Service Catalog for its IT Shop, and deployment and integration (4 to 5) documents three deployment models but the only documented public API covers the disk-encryption product. Sovereignty (6 to 7) rests on a Frankfurt legal entity and software stated as developed, hosted and supported in Europe. Pricing pages work on quote request.
Speaks for it
- Assets and CMDB scored 7, the highest mark in the table, for agentless discovery through data providers and a data gateway.
- Change and problem management scored 6, documenting ITIL standard, non-standard and emergency changes with ECAB approval and known-error flags.
- Assets live as configuration items in a CMDB with relationships, real-time tracking and dependency maps used for impact and root cause analysis.
- Three deployment models are documented: Matrix42 Cloud on an infrastructure provider in the customer's own country, Matrix42 Private Cloud in a customer-chosen data centre, and self-managed Matrix42 On-Premises.
- Sovereignty scored 6 to 7, citing Matrix42 GmbH of Frankfurt (register number HRB 129344), a German data protection officer, the Hessian supervisory authority, and software stated as developed, hosted and supported in Europe.
Held against it
- Service desk scored 4, with no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, assignment queues, time tracking or volume and resolution-time reporting.
- The only documented public API covers the full-disk-encryption product, and its reporting part is read-only.
- We found no public information on single sign-on, additional languages or satisfaction surveys for the self-service portal.
- We found no public information on the named hosting infrastructure, a subprocessor list or security certifications such as ISO 27001.
- No price figure appears on the captured pages; the pricing page works on quote request, with the Service Catalog module and Premium Services unpriced.
Best for
- You are replacing a spreadsheet inventory with agentless discovery, licence requirement analysis and a CMDB whose dependency maps feed impact and root cause analysis.
- You run ITIL change management and want standard, non-standard and emergency change types with CAB and ECAB approval paths.
- You want software stated as developed, hosted and supported in Europe, with a country-hosted cloud, a private cloud in a data centre you choose, or self-managed on-premises.
- You manage Oracle, SaaS or SAP estates and want the documented compliance add-ons that import computer and installed-application data.
Avoid if
- You need a documented REST API or webhooks for the service management platform itself — the only public API documented belongs to the disk-encryption product.
- You want the portal's service catalog without an extra licence — the IT Shop is available only with the separately licensed Matrix42 Service Catalog.
- You must budget or tender from published prices — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Service desk, incidents & requests | 2 of 5 |
| Change, problem & release management | 3 of 5 |
| Assets, CMDB & discovery | 3.5 of 5 |
| Self-service portal & service catalog | 2.5 of 5 |
| Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
Service desk, incidents & requests
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How tickets come in and get resolved: intake by email, portal, chat, phone and Microsoft Teams or Slack, incidents and service requests told apart, categories, priorities and an impact-urgency matrix, assignment rules and queues, SLAs with escalation and business hours, major incidents, templates and canned responses, a knowledge base for agents, automations and workflows, time tracking on tickets, and reports and dashboards on volume, resolution time and SLA compliance.
0 — Not a ticketing or service desk product; requests cannot be recorded and worked in it.
3 — Tickets from email and a web form with status, priority and assignment; SLAs, automation and reporting are basic or not described.
5 — Multi-channel intake (email, portal, chat or Teams), incidents and service requests told apart, assignment rules and queues, SLAs with escalation and business hours, an agent knowledge base, rule-based automations, and standard reports on volume, resolution time and SLA compliance.
8 — A visual workflow builder for any ticket type, major incident handling with communication to affected users, SLAs per service, customer and contract, skills- or load-based routing, time tracking on tickets, AI suggestions or classification with what they do stated, custom dashboards and scheduled reports, and a mobile app for agents.
10 — A service desk an organisation of thousands runs on: every workflow, form and SLA configurable without code and versioned, omnichannel intake with one history per requester, AI features documented with their data use and limits, operational level agreements and underpinning contracts tracked, and every report reproducible from an exportable ticket history.
The Service Desk Lead
Tickets, incidents and service requests are documented as distinct types with a lifecycle from incident to change, workflows automate processing, and a Microsoft Teams function with conversational AI is described for users. We found no public information on SLAs with automatic escalation, queues and assignment rules, or the volume, resolution-time and SLA reporting my IT director would read. 2 9 11
The MSP Owner
Incidents, service requests and changes are recorded as distinct ticket types, requests come in by email and the self-service portal, and the portal side carries a knowledge base, announcements and an AI promise of faster ticket processing. What decides it for me: I found no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, assignment queues, time tracking per ticket, or reporting on volume and resolution time — the backbone of sixty client contracts. 9 2 11 15
The Change & Configuration Manager
Incidents, service requests and changes are told apart with a documented ticket lifecycle, intake runs by email, self-service portal and the application, and there is an agent knowledge base, configurable workflows and Microsoft Teams with conversational AI for faster ticket work. I found no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, assignment queues, or reports on volume, resolution time and SLA compliance, which is what I would have to show an auditor. 2 9 11 15
The Municipal IT Lead
The documentation shows a ticket lifecycle from incident to change with tickets and service requests as distinct activatable types, and the product pages advertise email, portal and Microsoft Teams intake with AI-assisted processing. I found no public information on queues, SLAs with escalation and business hours, an agent knowledge base, or volume and resolution-time reporting. 9 2 11 1
The Solo IT Admin
There is a documented ticket lifecycle from incident to change, with tickets, incidents and service requests as separate types that can be activated, and non-standard requests can arrive by email, the self-service portal or the application; a built-in Microsoft Teams function with conversational AI and AI-assisted knowledge is described for faster ticket processing. We found no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, assignment queues, or volume, resolution-time and SLA reporting — exactly the things a one-person department relies on to know it is coping. 9 2 11
The Skeptic
The captured pages document intake by email, the self-service portal and Microsoft Teams, incidents and service requests told apart in the ticket types, a knowledge base, AI-assisted resolution, and a ticket lifecycle running from incident to change. We found no public information on SLAs with escalation and business hours, queues or routing rules, major incident handling, time tracking, or reporting on volume and resolution time. 2 9 10 11 15
Change, problem & release management
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The ITIL processes behind the ticket: problem records linked to incidents with root cause and known errors, change requests with standard, normal and emergency types, risk and impact assessment, approvals and a change advisory board, a change calendar with blackout periods, release and deployment records, links between changes, problems, incidents and configuration items, process certifications (PinkVERIFY, PeopleCert/AXELOS) named with their scope, and audit trails that a regulated buyer can show an auditor.
0 — No change or problem management of any kind; only tickets.
3 — A change or problem ticket type with a status and an approval step; change types, risk, calendar and links to incidents are basic or not described.
5 — Problem records linked to incidents with root cause and known errors, change requests with standard, normal and emergency types, multi-step approvals, a change calendar, changes linked to incidents and configuration items, and an audit trail of who approved what.
8 — Risk and impact assessment that reads affected services from the CMDB, a CAB workflow with agenda and decisions recorded, blackout periods and collision detection on the change calendar, release management with deployment tasks, change templates for standard changes, and an ITIL process certification named with the processes it covers.
10 — Change and problem management a regulated organisation can be audited on: every process configurable and versioned, change success and failure rates reported, a full trail from incident through problem and change to release exportable, the mapping to ISO/IEC 20000, ITIL 4 or DORA requirements documented, and certifications published with their scope and date.
The Service Desk Lead
Change management is documented in ITIL terms with standard, non-standard and emergency types, multi-phase workflows mixing approvals with automated tasks, and CAB and ECAB approval spelled out, while problems carry known-error flags with a separate workaround view and impact analysis reads affected services from the CMDB. We found no public information on a change calendar with blackout periods, release and deployment records, or an audit trail of approvals. 11 12 14
The MSP Owner
Standard, non-standard and emergency changes all exist per ITIL, with configurable workflows mixing approvals and manual tasks, emergency approval by an ECAB, problems flagged as known errors with journal entries, and impact analysis that reads the CMDB. I found no public information on a change calendar, blackout periods, release records or any process certification. 11 12 14
The Change & Configuration Manager
This is real ITIL change management: standard, non-standard and emergency types, phase-based workflows mixing approvals with manual and automation tasks, emergency changes reserved to change management with an emergency CAB path, and problems that can be flagged as known errors with a journalled comment; impact analysis reads the CMDB and the ticket lifecycle ties incidents to changes. I found no public information on a change calendar with blackout periods, release and deployment records, a named process certification, or an exportable trail of who approved which change. 9 11 12 14 16
The Municipal IT Lead
Standard, non-standard and emergency changes follow ITIL, with workflow phases mixing approvals, manual and technical tasks, verbal ECAB approval for emergencies, problems flaggable as known errors with journal entries, root cause analysis and impact analysis reading the CMDB. I found no public information on a change calendar, blackout periods, release management or a process certification with its scope. 11 12 14 9
The Solo IT Admin
Standard, non-standard and emergency changes are separated per ITIL with analysis, approval and review phases, workflow activities mixing approvals, manual tasks and technical automation, emergency changes restricted to change management, and problems that can be flagged as known errors with journal comments; impact analysis reading the CMDB is also documented. We found no public information on a change calendar, blackout periods, release records or a named ITIL process certification, so a regulated buyer would need to ask. 11 12 14
The Skeptic
The change process is documented with real depth: standard, non-standard and emergency types, workflow phases mixing approvals with manual and technical automation tasks, emergency changes approved verbally by the ECAB, and problems flagged as known errors with journal comments and a dedicated list. Impact analysis based on CMDB data and root cause analysis are also stated. We found no public information on a change calendar with blackout periods, release management with deployment tasks, or a named ITIL process certification. 11 12 14 9 16
Assets, CMDB & discovery
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the product knows about the things tickets are about: an asset inventory of hardware, software and licences, a CMDB with configuration item types, attributes and relationships, a service map or dependency view, agent-based or agentless discovery, imports and synchronisation from Active Directory, Entra ID, Intune, SCCM, JAMF or a discovery tool, software licence compliance, contracts, warranties and the asset life cycle, and assets linked to users, tickets and changes.
0 — No asset or configuration data at all; tickets cannot be linked to devices or services.
3 — A list of assets with basic fields that can be linked to a ticket; relationships, discovery and licences are basic or not described.
5 — An asset inventory of hardware and software, a CMDB with configurable CI types and relationships, network discovery or an inventory agent, an import or sync from Active Directory or Entra ID, contracts and warranties per asset, and assets linked to users, tickets and changes.
8 — A visual service and dependency map used for impact analysis, discovery documented for named platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, network devices, cloud accounts), connectors to named sources (Intune, SCCM, JAMF, VMware, AWS, Azure), software licence compliance and metering, the full asset life cycle from purchase to disposal, and data quality rules for the CMDB.
10 — A CMDB an organisation can trust for audits and outages: a documented data model with reconciliation of several sources, CI history and change tracking, service models from business service to infrastructure, licence optimisation for named vendors, and every CI and relationship exportable and reachable by API.
The Service Desk Lead
Agentless discovery through data gateways, Windows and Unix inventory providers, Active Directory import from multiple domains, and named virtualization sources (VMware vCenter, Hyper-V, Citrix XenServer) feed a CMDB whose CI relationships are visualized and used for impact and root-cause analysis — the asset truth I want behind every printer and VPN ticket. We found no public information on the asset life cycle from purchase to disposal or data quality rules for the CMDB. 13 14 3
The MSP Owner
Agentless discovery via data providers and a single gateway device, named connectors for Active Directory, Windows, Unix and VMware, Hyper-V and Citrix, licence requirements computed against licence models per software product, contract and vendor deadline alerts, and CI relationship maps used for root cause and impact analysis. Licence metering, CMDB data quality rules and the purchase-to-disposal life cycle are not described on the captured pages. 13 14 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
Agentless discovery is documented in unusual depth — Active Directory over several domains, Windows and Unix inventory with SQL, Exchange and SharePoint detail, VMware, Hyper-V and Citrix providers, a data-gateway model and custom network scans — feeding licence requirement analysis, compliance add-ons for Oracle, SaaS and SAP, and a dependency-mapping add-on that alerts on changes; assets live as configuration items with relationships, real-time state and impact analysis. I found no public information on connectors like Intune or SCCM, CMDB data-quality rules, or export of every configuration item. 3 13 14
The Municipal IT Lead
Assets are stored as configuration items in a CMDB with real-time relationship tracking and interactive maps used for impact analysis, and agentless discovery is documented through Windows and Unix inventory, VMware, Hyper-V and Citrix providers, multi-domain Active Directory imports, licence requirement analysis and contract deadline notifications. I found no public information on cloud or modern-management connectors, licence metering, or the full purchase-to-disposal life cycle. 13 14 3
The Solo IT Admin
Agentless discovery through data gateways with Windows and Unix inventory (CPU, memory, installed applications, even SQL, Exchange and SharePoint editions), Active Directory imports of computers, users and groups, VMware, Hyper-V and Citrix providers, and background processing that creates licence requirements per software product — this is what would finally replace the spreadsheet nobody trusts. Assets live as configuration items in a CMDB with real-time relationship tracking, contracts and deadline notifications sit alongside them, and a Discovery & Dependency Mapping add-on watches applications, network, cloud, storage and devices. We found no public information on connectors such as Intune, SCCM, JAMF or cloud accounts, on licence metering, or on CMDB data quality rules. 13 3 14
The Skeptic
The strongest-documented area: agentless discovery through data providers and a single data gateway, named sources (Active Directory, VMware vCenter, Hyper-V, Citrix XenServer, Windows and Unix inventory including SQL, Exchange and SharePoint editions), licence requirement analysis against licence models, contracts with deadline alerts, and a CMDB holding assets as configuration items with relationships, interactive dependency maps and real-time tracking. We found no public information on connectors such as Intune, SCCM or JAMF, licence metering, the purchase-to-disposal life cycle, or CMDB data quality rules. 13 14 3
Self-service portal & service catalog
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What employees or clients see: a self-service portal with the service catalog, request forms with fields and approvals per service, ticket status and history for the requester, a searchable knowledge base for end users, announcements and outage notices, a virtual agent or chatbot, password reset or other automated fulfilment, branding and languages, single sign-on for the portal, access from Teams or a mobile app, and satisfaction surveys.
0 — No portal or end-user access of any kind; requests can only be emailed or phoned in.
3 — A web portal where users open tickets and see their status; a catalog, knowledge base and approvals are basic or not described.
5 — A branded portal with a service catalog, request forms with approval steps, an end-user knowledge base with search, ticket status and history, announcements, single sign-on, several languages, and satisfaction surveys after resolution.
8 — A service catalog with conditional forms, costs and delivery times per item, automated fulfilment for named requests (password reset, software install, onboarding), a virtual agent in the portal and in Teams or Slack, deflection measured, portals per client or department, and accessibility (WCAG) stated.
10 — A portal that runs as the front door of the organisation: catalog, forms and fulfilment built without code and reused across IT, HR and facilities, the virtual agent documented with its sources and data use, deflection and satisfaction reported per service, and accessibility conformance published with its level.
The Service Desk Lead
The self-service portal ships a service catalog (the "IT Shop") targeting services per user, location, role and cost centre, approval steps with email notification to the orderer, an end-user knowledge base, announcements, and a workplace view of one's orders and hardware. We found no public information on single sign-on for the portal, languages, satisfaction surveys, or automated fulfilment such as password reset. 15 16 2
The MSP Owner
The portal is a real shop: services targeted by user, location, role and cost center, approval steps scoped to the responsible decider, a knowledge base with announcements, and each user's tickets, orders and hardware in one workplace. I found no public information on single sign-on, languages, satisfaction surveys, branding or a separate portal per client, which is what a sixty-client operation actually needs. 15 16 2
The Change & Configuration Manager
The portal is documented end to end: a catalog showing services per user, role, location and cost centre, approvals with comments and decline reasons sent to the requester, a knowledge base, announcements, and a support area for tickets and change requests, with standard changes reusable as provisioning actions for catalog orders and conversational AI in Teams for self-resolution. I found no public information on single sign-on for the portal, languages, satisfaction surveys or accessibility. 2 11 15 16
The Municipal IT Lead
The portal offers a catalog presenting services per user, location, role or cost centre, approvals by deciders with mandatory comments and emailed decline reasons, and a support area with knowledge base and announcements — though the catalog requires a separately licensed module. I found no public information on single sign-on, portal languages, satisfaction surveys or accessibility. 15 16 2
The Solo IT Admin
The portal is documented in six areas — a catalog ('IT shop') showing services per user, role, location and cost center, the requester's tickets and hardware, a knowledge base, announcements, and approvals handled by cost-center managers with comments emailed back to the person who ordered. Conversational AI in Microsoft Teams is said to cut ticket volume through users solving problems themselves. We found no public information on branding, single sign-on, multiple languages, satisfaction surveys or knowledge base search. 15 16 2
The Skeptic
The portal is described with six areas including the catalog (an IT Shop that requires the separately licensed Service Catalog module), order approvals whose comments and decline reasons go to the requester by email, a knowledge base, announcements and per-user ticket and change history. We found no public information on single sign-on for the portal, additional languages, satisfaction surveys, or accessibility conformance. 15 16 2
Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product is run and connected: a cloud edition and an on-premise or open-source edition with feature parity stated, system requirements and update cadence, a documented REST API and webhooks, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams, Entra ID, Slack, monitoring tools, RMM and remote support tools, single sign-on (SAML, OIDC) and SCIM, roles and permissions, multi-client or multi-tenant operation with separated data for MSPs, time and contract billing for MSPs, a migration path from other tools, and a public status page.
0 — No documented way to run, connect or administer the product.
3 — Runs as one edition with user roles and an email connection; the API, integrations and other editions are basic or not described.
5 — A documented REST API, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams and Entra ID or Active Directory, single sign-on, role-based permissions, at least one monitoring or remote support integration, and either an on-premise edition or a stated hosting model with uptime terms.
8 — Cloud and on-premise or open-source editions with feature parity stated, webhooks and an integration marketplace, SCIM provisioning, multi-tenant operation with separated client data for MSPs, time and contract billing, named RMM and monitoring connectors, a documented migration from named tools, and a public status page with uptime history.
10 — Operation at scale and on the customer's terms: open-source code under a named licence or a self-hosted edition with full parity, configuration as code or a staging-to-production transport documented, an API covering every object, high availability and disaster recovery documented, and SLA and support terms published.
The Service Desk Lead
Three deployment models are clearly documented — SaaS hosted by a cloud provider in the customer's country, private cloud in a customer-chosen data centre, and a self-managed on-premises edition — alongside Microsoft Teams integration and Active Directory import. The public API pages captured describe script and reporting APIs for the full-disk-encryption product rather than the service management platform, and we found no public information on webhooks, SCIM provisioning, or multi-client operation for managed service providers. 4 17 18 2 13
The MSP Owner
Three deployment models are documented — vendor-managed cloud on a provider in the customer's country, private cloud in a data center of my choosing, and full on-premises — plus Microsoft Teams, Active Directory and the vendor's own endpoint management. The API documentation I found covers the disk-encryption product, with a reporting part that reads configuration only. I found no public information on separated multi-client data, time and contract billing for service providers, SCIM provisioning or a public status page. 17 4 18 13 2
The Change & Configuration Manager
Three deployment models are clearly documented — country-hosted SaaS with a local infrastructure provider, a private cloud in a data centre the customer chooses, and a fully self-managed on-premises edition — alongside Microsoft Teams and Active Directory connections. The public API that is documented covers the disk-encryption product's script and reporting interfaces rather than service-management objects, and I found no public information on single sign-on, SCIM, webhooks, multi-client operation for service providers, or a public status page. 2 4 13 17 18
The Municipal IT Lead
Three deployment models are documented including a customer-managed on-premises edition with vendor expert support, alongside Microsoft Teams integration and Active Directory import. The only public API documented on the captured pages belongs to the disk-encryption product with a read-only reporting part, and I found no public information on a service-management REST API, feature parity across editions, single sign-on and provisioning standards, multi-client operation or a public status page. 4 17 2 18 15
The Solo IT Admin
Three deployment models are documented: a cloud hosted by an infrastructure provider in the customer's own country, a private cloud in a data center the customer chooses, and a self-managed on-premises edition. Active Directory import and a built-in Microsoft Teams function are documented, but the public API page describes script and reporting interfaces for the EgoSecure full-disk-encryption product rather than a REST API for the service platform. We found no public information on single sign-on, SCIM provisioning, multi-client operation for service providers, a documented migration path or a public status page. 17 13 2 18
The Skeptic
Three deployment models are documented — vendor-managed SaaS hosted by a cloud infrastructure provider in the customer's own country, a private cloud in a customer-chosen data centre, and self-managed on-premises — together with Microsoft Teams and Active Directory integration. The only API documentation captured concerns the full-disk-encryption product, assumes the calling program runs on the encrypted machine, and its reporting part is read-only; we found no public information on a REST API or webhooks for the service management platform, single sign-on, SCIM, multi-client operation for service providers, or a public status page. We found no public information on whether the on-premises edition carries the same features as the cloud editions. 4 17 2 13 18 5
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where tickets, attachments, user directories and CMDB data are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, email delivery, AI features, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; a service desk holds personal data about every employee and often credentials and network details, so the whole chain counts, not only the database. An on-premise or open-source edition the customer runs on its own European servers counts as the customer's chain, whatever the vendor's seat.
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 delivery, AI features, support access, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard, or the vendor is non-EU with an EU data centre option.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, BSI C5, SOC 2) stated — or an on-premise edition documented that keeps every record on the customer's own servers.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, or a self-hosted open-source edition with no call home, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Service Desk Lead
The contracting entity is Matrix42 GmbH in Frankfurt with a German register number and a German data protection officer, the software is described as developed, hosted and supported in Europe with a provider in the customer's own country, an on-premises edition keeps operation fully in-house, and customer processing is stated to be governed by a data processing agreement. We found no public information on the named hosting infrastructure, subprocessor locations, security certifications, or a published data processing agreement. 7 4 1 17 8
The MSP Owner
The contracting entity is provably German — the legal notice names Matrix42 GmbH in Frankfurt with a commercial register number — and the vendor states the software is developed, hosted and supported in Europe, on a cloud provider in the customer's own country, with an on-premises edition for full in-house operation; the privacy statement confirms a data processing agreement governs product use. The hosting infrastructure is not named, and I found no subprocessor list and no stated security certification. 7 1 4 17 8
The Change & Configuration Manager
The chain looks European on what I can verify: Matrix42 GmbH in Frankfurt with a German register number and VAT ID, a named data protection officer and the Hessian supervisory authority, hosting developed, run and supported in Europe with a country-local cloud provider, a customer-chosen data centre and a full on-premises option, and any transfers outside the EEA covered by stated safeguards. I found no public information on the subprocessor list, the named hosting infrastructure, or security certifications such as ISO 27001. 1 4 7 8 17
The Municipal IT Lead
A German company in Frankfurt with a German VAT number, a German data protection officer and the Hessian supervisory authority named, software developed, hosted and supported in Europe with a country-local cloud provider or a customer-chosen data centre, and a documented on-premises option. The cloud infrastructure is not named, no subprocessor list or security certification appears, and the privacy policy that mentions international transfers with EU-US framework safeguards explicitly excludes product processing on behalf of customers, which it says is governed by the customer contract and a data processing agreement. 7 4 17 1 8
The Solo IT Admin
The contracting entity is Matrix42 GmbH in Frankfurt am Main with a German commercial register number and VAT ID, an external German data protection officer, the Hessian supervisory authority named, and a data processing agreement referenced for customer data alongside named transfer safeguards such as EU standard contractual clauses. The company states its software is developed, hosted and supported in Europe, works with a cloud provider in the customer's country, and offers a fully self-managed on-premises edition. The hosting provider itself is not named, and we found no public information on a subprocessor list or security certifications such as ISO 27001. 7 8 4 17 1
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Matrix42 GmbH of Frankfurt with a German register number and VAT ID, an external German data protection officer and the Hessian supervisory authority, and the pages state the software is developed, hosted and supported in Europe, with in-country cloud hosting, a private-cloud option, an on-premises edition and a data processing agreement referenced for customer data. The hosting infrastructure provider stays unnamed, and we found no public information on subprocessors or security certifications such as ISO 27001, BSI C5 or SOC 2. 7 8 4 17 1
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per agent, technician or analyst and tier, whether requesters and portal users are free, what counts as an asset or node and how it is priced, which modules (CMDB, change, asset discovery, AI, ESM) cost extra, the on-premise licence or subscription and its maintenance, the free or open-source edition and paid support, minimum term, onboarding and setup.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free edition exists, but how cost scales with agents, assets or modules is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per agent and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (asset packs, CMDB or discovery, AI features, on-premise licence, onboarding) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (agents, assets, clients), add-ons and asset packs priced, the on-premise licence and maintenance or the open-source support plans priced, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of agents, assets and modules, cloud or on premise, with every add-on, setup, training, support and overage fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Service Desk Lead
The captured pricing page works on quote request, and the only cost statements we found are a claim of transparent, predictable costs plus named but unpriced pieces: the separately licensed service catalog, the discovery and dependency mapping add-on, and optional Premium Services support. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from public pages alone. 6 4 15 3
The MSP Owner
The captured pricing pages offer a quote on request; I found no public information on a price per technician, tier inclusions, or the cost of the service catalog module, the discovery add-on and the premium support package — only a general claim of transparent costs without figures. For a team planning to double, no annual cost can be worked out from public pages. 6 4 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
The pricing page names three ways to buy and the vendor advertises "transparente Kosten", but no price per agent, tier or module appears anywhere I read — Premium Services, the compliance add-ons and the separately licensed Service Catalog are all unpriced, and the page works on a quote on request. A buyer cannot compute any annual cost from public information. 3 4 6 15
The Municipal IT Lead
The captured pricing page works on quote on request and shows no figures, while the cloud pages only claim costs are transparent and more plannable than public-cloud models. I found no public price per agent, no asset-pack or module pricing such as for the separately licensed catalog, and no on-premises licence or maintenance terms our procurement office could put into a tender. 6 4
The Solo IT Admin
We found no price figures of any kind: the captured pages about prices present purchase options, competitor comparisons and telephone support hours, and the only pricing statement is the marketing phrase 'transparente Kosten'. As a one-person IT department I cannot read off what a year of this costs for my agents and assets, or which modules cost extra, from these pages. 6 4
The Skeptic
The captured packages page presents three purchase routes and works on request for a quote; no price figure appears on any captured page. "Transparent costs" is asserted without a number, the separately licensed Service Catalog module is unpriced, and optional Premium Services are described without prices. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from public pages. 6 4 15 3
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 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 | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Matrix42 Service Management
Is Matrix42 Service Management European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Matrix42 Service Management as EU-Made.
Where does Matrix42 Service Management store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Matrix42 Service Management have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Matrix42 Service Management?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus (3.5/5), Xurrent ITSM (3/5) and GLPI (3/5) highest among the other 14 IT Service 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 GLPI (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Matrix42 Service Management alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Nov 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, Hosting options. 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.
- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- 29 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 compliance 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
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (18)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (ITSM) www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (IT asset management) www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (cloud and on-premise editions) www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Company page (acquisition of Efecte) www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Packages page (quote on request) www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Legal notice www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Change, problem & release management — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Change, problem & release management — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Assets, CMDB & discovery — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Assets, CMDB & discovery — found from sitemap www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap www.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 18 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap docs.matrix42.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →