IT Service Management
OMNITRACKER ITSM Center
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by OMNINET Software-, System- und Projektmanagementtechnik GmbH · www.omnitracker.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.
OMNITRACKER ITSM Center at a glance
- Vendor
- OMNINET Software-, System- und Projektmanagementtechnik 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 OMNITRACKER ITSM Center 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. OMNITRACKER ITSM Center, from OMNINET Software-, System- und Projektmanagementtechnik GmbH (Eckental, Germany), runs ITSM on the OMNITRACKER low-code platform in cloud, on-premises or hybrid operation. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
OMNITRACKER ITSM Center, from OMNINET Software-, System- und Projektmanagementtechnik GmbH (Eckental, Germany), runs ITSM on the OMNITRACKER low-code platform in cloud, on-premises or hybrid operation. It scores strongest on the service desk, where scores run from 4 to 7 and cluster at 6: AI classifies and routes incoming tickets by business impact and drafts solutions from the knowledge base, with SLAs, KPI dashboards and BI reports; the low score marks intake channels, SLA escalation and time tracking as undescribed, the high one credits the AI and BPMN workflow depth. Sovereignty follows at 6 to 7, split between the German entity, stated EU hosting, ISO 27001, IDW attestations and on-premises operation even for AI, and reservations over unnamed hosting infrastructure and no public information on a data processing agreement or product subprocessors. Weakest are change and problem at 2 to 4 and assets and CMDB at 3 to 4: the ITIL practice names appear, but we found no public information on change approvals, discovery or directory imports. Pages state no prices; a fixed-price quickstart with four-week setup carries no figure.
Speaks for it
- AI classifies incoming tickets by real business impact, routes them to the right expert and drafts solution suggestions from the knowledge base, with its activity audit-logged
- Workflows, forms and processes are modelled to the BPMN 2.0 standard and adapted independently through low-code customisation
- Self-service portals are built per target group without programming, in full corporate design with live device preview, and portal requests pass directly into existing workflows
- Cloud, on-premises and hybrid operation are all offered, AI models can run fully on-premises, and individual configurations survive every release by contractual guarantee
- The contracting entity is German (Eckental, Amtsgericht Fürth, HRB 5881), EU hosting is stated, and ISO 27001, ISO 9001 and IDW PS 880/951 attestations are published
Held against it
- We found no public information on change types, approvals, a change advisory board, a change calendar with blackout periods, or problem records with root cause and known errors
- We found no public information on discovery of any kind, imports or synchronisation from Active Directory, Entra ID or management tools, licence compliance, or contracts and warranties per asset
- The integration evidence stops at a stated open-interfaces claim, with no public information on a documented REST API, webhooks, or named integrations such as Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID
- We found no public information on intake channels such as email, chat or Microsoft Teams, on SLA escalation with business hours, on major incident handling or on time tracking on tickets
- The EU hosting claim names no infrastructure provider, and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement or on subprocessors for the product chain itself
Best for
- You need a vendor under German law with EU hosting stated and an on-premises edition in which even the AI models can run in your own infrastructure
- You want to build and change ITSM workflows yourself on a BPMN 2.0 low-code platform whose configurations are contractually preserved across releases
- You plan branded self-service portals for distinct target groups that hand requests straight into existing workflows without data copies
- You operate for authorities, KRITIS or other regulated sectors where anchored audit trails and revision-safe documentation are baseline demands
Avoid if
- You must compute an annual cost from public pages — the captured pages state no prices and lead only to a live demo and sales contact
- Your shortlist requires documented change and asset depth up front — the captured pages name the ITIL practices without change types, approvals, discovery or directory imports
- Your procurement needs named integrations and a documented API before contact — the public integration evidence is a stated open-interfaces claim with no named connectors
- You require no non-European processors in the vendor's own chain — the privacy policy names US providers (Vimeo, HubSpot, LinkedIn) and an Israeli one (Elementor) for the vendor's website, each with a stated transfer safeguard
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Service desk, incidents & requests | 3 of 5 |
| Change, problem & release management | 2 of 5 |
| Assets, CMDB & discovery | 2 of 5 |
| Self-service portal & service catalog | 2 of 5 |
| Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3.5 of 5 |
Service desk, incidents & requests
panel disagrees
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
The ITSM pages document incident and service request management as separate ITIL practices, SLAs with KPI dashboards and BI reports, a knowledge base the AI searches for ready-made solution suggestions, and AI that classifies and routes incoming tickets by real business impact with its behaviour spelled out; low-code workflow and BPMN 2.0 modelling let my team rebuild processes ourselves. What I miss for a Monday-morning operation is any description of multi-channel intake such as Teams or chat, SLA escalation with business hours, major incident handling and time tracking on tickets. 1 2 3
The MSP Owner
The strongest area for my desk: BPMN 2.0 workflows and low-code forms, AI that classifies incoming tickets, routes them to the right expert, weighs business impact and drafts solutions from the knowledge database, plus SLAs with KPI dashboards and BI reports and CMDB dependencies shown right in the ticket. I found no public information on time tracking per ticket, major-incident communication, or a mobile app for my technicians. 1 2
The Change & Configuration Manager
Incidents and service requests run on one documented lifecycle, an AI classifies and routes incoming tickets with its function stated and its activity audit-logged, and there are KPI dashboards, BI reports and SLAs on a low-code workflow platform. We found no public information on intake channels beyond the portal, major-incident handling, time tracking on tickets or a mobile app for agents. 1 2 3
The Municipal IT Lead
The ITSM Center names incident management and service request management as ITIL processes, with knowledge management, SLA measurement through KPI dashboards and BI reports, BPMN 2.0 automation, and AI that classifies incoming tickets, routes them to the right expert and drafts solution proposals from the knowledge base — each described with what it does. The captured pages do not show intake channels beyond the self-service portal, nor SLA escalation with business hours, time tracking on tickets or a mobile app for agents. 1 2 3
The Solo IT Admin
ITSM Center covers incidents and service requests through to changes and assets, names knowledge management, service level management and monitoring among its ITIL practices, and documents AI that classifies incoming tickets, routes them to the right expert and drafts solutions from the knowledge base — plus a BPMN 2.0 engine and low-code workflow customisation I could run myself. We found no public information on email or Microsoft Teams intake, queues, business hours or escalation detail, which is how most of my 160 users would actually raise a ticket. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
Incidents and service requests are named and told apart, SLAs, KPI dashboards and BI reports make service processes measurable, AI classifies and routes incoming tickets by business impact with audit logging, and workflows and forms are adaptable by low-code. We found no public information on intake channels such as email, chat or Microsoft Teams, on queues and assignment rules, SLA escalation with business hours, major incident handling or time tracking on tickets. 1 2 3
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 enablement, problem management and release management are named as ITIL practices the ITSM Center covers, the platform anchors end-to-end audit trails and revision-safe documentation, and an ITIL certification is stated. The captured pages stop at that level of depth: we found no public information on change types, multi-step approvals or a change advisory board, a change calendar, or problem records with root cause and known errors. 1 2 3 11
The MSP Owner
Change Enablement, Problem Management and Release Management are all named practices, the product is described as ITIL-certified, and complete audit trails with revision-safe documentation are confirmed. Beyond those names I found no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar, or problem records linked to incidents, which is what my regulated clients would ask me to show an auditor. 1 2 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
Change enablement, problem management and release management are named ITIL practices, CMDB-CI dependencies surface directly in the ticket, and end-to-end audit trails with revision-safe documentation are stated alongside a claimed ITIL certification. We found no public information on standard, normal and emergency change types, a change calendar with blackout periods, CAB decisions, root cause and known-error records, or the certification's scope — the records I must show an auditor. 1 2 3
The Municipal IT Lead
Problem management, change enablement and release management are named among fifteen supported ITIL practices on a platform marketed as ITIL-certified, with audit trails and revision-safe documentation anchored in the platform and CMDB asset dependencies shown directly in tickets. The captured pages say nothing about change types, approvals or a change advisory board, root cause and known errors, or a change calendar with blackout periods, and the certification is named without its scope — nothing I could yet hand an auditor for the change process itself. 1 2 3
The Solo IT Admin
Change enablement, problem management and release management are named ITIL practices in ITSM Center, the suite carries an ITIL certification claim, and audit trails with role-based permissions are described as firmly anchored. We found no public information on change types, approval steps, a change calendar or how changes, problems and incidents link, so I cannot tell from the pages how much of the change machinery is really there. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
Change Enablement, Problem Management and Release Management appear as named ITIL practices, the lifecycle is described as running from incidents and service requests up to changes, and audit trails with revision-safe documentation are anchored in the platform. Beyond those names we found no public information on change types, approvals or a change advisory board, a change calendar with blackout periods, risk assessment, or problem records with root cause and known errors; the ITIL certification is stated without its process scope. 1 2 3
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
What caught my eye is the statement that CMDB asset dependencies appear directly in the ticket, with IT asset management and service configuration management named as covered practices on a shared data platform. Beyond that the depth is thin: we found no public information on discovery, imports or synchronisation from Active Directory or Entra ID, licence compliance, or contracts and warranties per asset. 2 3 13
The MSP Owner
A CMDB exists with asset dependencies visible directly in the ticket, and Service Configuration Management and IT Asset Management are named practices alongside a lifecycle running from incidents and service requests to changes and assets. I found no public information on discovery, imports from Entra ID, Intune or JAMF, licence compliance, or contracts and warranties per asset. 2 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
A CMDB exists whose asset dependencies appear in the ticket, IT asset management and service configuration management are named practices, and asset management includes a protection-needs analysis per asset. We found no public information on configurable CI types and relationships, discovery, imports from directories or management tools, or licence compliance and contracts. 2 13
The Municipal IT Lead
The evidence reaches CMDB dependencies visible directly in the ticket, IT asset management and service configuration management as named practices, and a protection-needs analysis within asset management that fits our Grundschutz working method. Discovery, synchronisation from Active Directory or Entra ID, licence compliance and contracts or warranties per asset are not described on the captured pages. 2 13
The Solo IT Admin
A CMDB exists with asset dependencies shown directly in the ticket, IT asset management and service configuration management are named practices, so tickets about a laptop will carry its context. We found no public information on discovery, imports from Active Directory, Entra ID or Intune, licences or contracts — the automatic finding of laptops and licences I need is simply not described. 2 3 13
The Skeptic
CMDB asset dependencies are displayed directly in the ticket, and Service Configuration Management and IT Asset Management are named ITIL practices — a step beyond a bare device list. We found no public information on configurable CI types and relationships, discovery of any kind, imports or synchronisation from Active Directory, Entra ID or management tools, software licence compliance, or contracts, warranties and the asset life cycle. 2 13
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 Portal Client is described as a no-code builder in our own corporate design with live preview on desktop, tablet and smartphone, one portal per target group, and requests handed straight into existing workflows, with a claim that self-service reduces tickets by up to 35 percent. For deflecting my Monday printer and VPN tickets the pages fall short: we found no public information on request forms with approval steps, catalog items with costs and delivery times, announcements, single sign-on, or satisfaction surveys. 2 3 14
The MSP Owner
A genuine MSP story: no-code self-service portals for each target group, fully in corporate design, built by drag and drop, working live on the main system with requests handed straight into existing workflows, plus a claimed 35 percent ticket reduction through self-service. I found no public information on a service catalog, end-user knowledge base with search, approval steps, single sign-on, or satisfaction surveys. 1 2 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
A no-code portal builder creates branded self-service portals per target group in full corporate design, with drag-and-drop editing, device preview and requests handed directly into existing workflows on live data, and the vendor reports up to 35 percent ticket reduction through self-service. We found no public information on single sign-on, languages, satisfaction surveys or a virtual agent for end users. 2 3
The Municipal IT Lead
The Portal Client is well documented: self-service portals for each target group built without programming, in our corporate design, with drag-and-drop editing, preview across desktop, tablet and smartphone, permissions inherited automatically and portal requests passed directly into existing workflows — alongside a claimed ticket reduction of up to 35 percent through self-service. What the pages do not describe is a service catalog with approval steps per service, an end-user knowledge base with search, single sign-on for the portal, further languages or satisfaction surveys. 1 2 3
The Solo IT Admin
The Portal Client builds branded self-service portals without code — drag-and-drop pages, my own colours and logos, live previews for desktop, tablet and phone, requests handed straight into existing workflows, and a claimed up to 35% ticket reduction through self-service. The service catalog appears only as a named ITIL practice, and we found no public information on single sign-on, languages, satisfaction surveys or a virtual agent for end users. 2 3 14
The Skeptic
The Portal Client is documented as no-code portal building by drag and drop, per target audience, in full corporate design with live preview on desktop, tablet and smartphone, and portal requests pass directly into existing workflows without data copies; a reduction of up to 35 percent of tickets through self-service is claimed. We found no public information on a service catalog with conditional forms, approvals and delivery times, an end-user knowledge base with search, single sign-on, announcements, satisfaction surveys or a virtual agent in the portal. 2 3
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
Cloud, on-premises and hybrid operation are all offered, releases are versioned with our configurations contractually preserved across them, AI can run fully on-premises in our own infrastructure, and open interfaces plus role-based permissions are stated. However, we found no public information on a documented REST API, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID, single sign-on or SCIM, webhooks or an integration marketplace, multi-tenant operation for service providers, or a public status page. 1 2 3
The MSP Owner
Cloud, on-premises and hybrid operation are documented, AI models can run fully on-premises, role-based permissions and open interfaces are confirmed, and my configurations survive every release by contract. For running sixty clients I found no public information on a documented REST API, Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID integrations, single sign-on, RMM or monitoring connectors, multi-client data separation, or time and contract billing. 1 2 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
Cloud, hybrid and on-premises operation are offered, AI models can run fully on-premises, individual configurations survive every platform release by contractual guarantee, and open interfaces with role-based permissions are stated. We found no public information on a documented REST API or webhooks, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID, single sign-on, multi-client operation for service providers, or a public status page. 1 2 3
The Municipal IT Lead
Cloud, hybrid and on-premises operation are all offered, AI models can run fully on-premises in our own infrastructure, individual configurations survive every release by contractual guarantee, and open interfaces and role-based permissions are stated. I found no public information on a documented REST API with webhooks, single sign-on via SAML or OIDC, named integrations such as Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID, multi-client operation, a migration path from other tools or a public status page. 1 2 3
The Solo IT Admin
Cloud, on-premises and hybrid operation are all documented, custom configurations survive every release by contract, AI models can run fully on-premises, and there is a four-week fixed-price quickstart. The integration story stops at 'open interfaces': we found no public information on a REST API, webhooks, Microsoft 365 or Teams connectors, single sign-on, multi-client operation or a public status page. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
Cloud, on-premises and hybrid operation are all stated, individual configurations survive every release by contractual guarantee, role-based permissions are anchored in the platform, open interfaces are claimed, and even AI models can run fully on-premises in the customer's own infrastructure. We found no public information on a documented REST API, webhooks, named integrations such as Microsoft 365, Teams or Entra ID, single sign-on and SCIM, multi-client operation for service providers, or whether the on-premises edition carries the same features as the cloud edition. 1 2 3
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 a German company in Eckental registered at the Fürth district court under German law, group companies sit in Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands, hosting is stated as in the EU, and ISO 27001 is certified alongside IDW audits and membership in the BSI cyber security alliance. The gaps hold it back: the hosting infrastructure is not named, and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement or on the subprocessors behind the product itself; the privacy policy names non-European providers such as Vimeo, HubSpot and LinkedIn for the website, each with an adequacy or standard contractual clause safeguard stated. 1 2 3 4 5 6
The MSP Owner
German vendor and entity with register court and German law, hosting stated as in the EU, ISO 27001 published alongside ISO 9001 and IDW attestations, and an on-premises edition where even the AI runs on my own infrastructure. The product's own chain is thinner in public: I found no named EU hosting infrastructure, no published data processing agreement, and no subprocessor list for the service itself — the captured subprocessors cover the vendor's website. 1 2 3 5 6
The Change & Configuration Manager
The contracting entity is a German GmbH registered at Amtsgericht Fürth under German law, hosting is stated as within the EU, ISO 27001 is certified alongside the financial-industry audits IDW PS 880 and PS 951, the privacy policy names subprocessors with locations and transfer mechanisms, and an on-premises edition puts operation on our own servers. We found no public information on a published data processing agreement or the named hosting infrastructure, and the subprocessor list covers the website chain rather than product operations. 1 3 5 6
The Municipal IT Lead
This is a German contracting entity in Eckental under German law, with EU hosting stated, ISO 27001 certification, IDW-audited software development, membership in the BSI's Alliance for Cyber Security, references from federal and state authorities, and an on-premises edition that would keep our staff and device data in our own chain — the privacy policy also names subprocessors with locations and transfer bases, though those concern the vendor's website. For a tender I would still need the cloud hosting infrastructure named and a published data processing agreement, which the captured pages do not show. 1 2 3 5 6 7
The Solo IT Admin
A German GmbH in Eckental under German law (HRB 5881, Amtsgericht Fürth), EU hosting stated on the product page, on-premises operation including on-premises AI, ISO 27001 and 9001 plus IDW-audited development, and a privacy policy naming subprocessors with their locations and transfer safeguards — about as European a chain as I could ask for. It stays a notch below the top because the hosting infrastructure is not named and we found no public information on a data processing agreement for the product itself. 1 2 3 5 6
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is demonstrably German — imprint and privacy policy name OMNINET GmbH in Eckental with register court Fürth, HRB 5881 and a German VAT number — EU hosting is claimed, ISO 27001 and the IDW PS 880/951 attestations are stated alongside BSI cyber-security alliance membership, and the Swiss group company is covered by an adequacy decision. The EU hosting claim names no data-centre or infrastructure provider, and we found no public information on a data processing agreement or on subprocessors for the product chain itself — hosting, email delivery, support — though an on-premises edition, including the AI, is documented for the customer's own infrastructure. 1 2 3 5 6
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 pages show no prices at all: the route to a number is booking a roughly 30-minute live demo and contacting sales, and the only pricing-adjacent statement is a fixed-price ITSM quickstart with four-week setup that carries no figure. I cannot begin to compute an annual cost for my agents and 1,400 employees from anything public. 2 3
The MSP Owner
No price figures are public: the captured page points only to booking a live demo and contacting sales, and the four-week ITSM quickstart is promised at a fixed price without stating the figure. I cannot compute an annual cost for my technician count from anything captured. 2 3
The Change & Configuration Manager
The captured pages state no prices and route buyers to a live demo and sales contact, though a fixed-price ITSM quickstart with a four-week setup is named without any figure. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from public pages. 2 3
The Municipal IT Lead
No prices appear on the captured pages — the product pages lead only to demo booking and sales contact — and the single pricing-relevant statement is an ITSM Quickstart at a fixed price with the system running in four weeks, without any figure. My procurement office cannot put an unpriced fixed-price offer into a tender, so no annual cost is computable from public pages. 2 3
The Solo IT Admin
We found no public prices on any captured page: the product page's call to action is to book a live demo and contact sales, and even the four-week ITSM quickstart is offered at a fixed price with no figure published. For a one-person IT shop wanting to read the annual cost off a website, that is the deal-breaker. 2 3
The Skeptic
The captured pages state no price figures at all and point to booking a live demo and contacting sales. The only pricing-adjacent statement is a fixed-price ITSM quickstart with a four-week setup whose amount is not published; no per-agent price, tier, module price or licence and maintenance price appears anywhere we read. 2 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 OMNITRACKER ITSM Center
Is OMNITRACKER ITSM Center European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies OMNITRACKER ITSM Center as EU-Made.
Where does OMNITRACKER ITSM Center store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does OMNITRACKER ITSM Center have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to OMNITRACKER ITSM Center?
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: OMNITRACKER ITSM Center 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.
- 9 subprocessors facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 7 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
- 4 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 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
- 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
- 1 support 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 (17)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (ITSM) www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (self-service portal) www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Security / trust page (ISO 27001) www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Legal notice www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Privacy policy www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Terms of service www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Change, problem & release management — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Change, problem & release management — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Assets, CMDB & discovery — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Assets, CMDB & discovery — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap www.omnitracker.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →