Knowledge Base & Wiki
Nuclino
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Nuclino GmbH · www.nuclino.com
Compare with Slite → 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.
Nuclino at a glance
- Vendor
- Nuclino 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
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 1 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Nuclino 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Nuclino, a team wiki from Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald, Germany, is strongest on access control, scoring 6 across the table: workspace-level roles, private workspaces, SAML single sign-on via ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID, two-factor authentication, admin limits on public sharing and export, and AI connections respecting account permissions. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 1 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Nuclino, a team wiki from Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald, Germany, is strongest on access control, scoring 6 across the table: workspace-level roles, private workspaces, SAML single sign-on via ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID, two-factor authentication, admin limits on public sharing and export, and AI connections respecting account permissions. Authoring and search and publishing and integrations, both 5 to 6, follow, resting on collaborative documents with version restore, a template library, a Markdown API, and an MCP server available on all plans connecting Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor. Weakest are knowledge governance and portability and hosting, at 3 to 4: beyond version history and a team-event log, no public information appears on page owners, review dates, approval workflows, a Confluence migration path or a full export with attachments. Judges split on sovereignty, 4 to 6, crediting the German entity and a dated subprocessor list with data location Europe for both or weighing the privacy policy's transfer reservation and no published data processing agreement, and on pricing transparency, 3 to 5, where an explicit user definition meets captured pricing pages without per-user prices.
Speaks for it
- Access control scores 6 across the table, with SAML single sign-on via ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID, two-factor authentication, workspace-level roles, private workspaces and admin limits on public sharing and export
- AI connections, including the MCP server, only see content the connected account can access
- The MCP server is documented in real depth, connecting Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code and Windsurf over OAuth 2.0, and is available on all plans
- A documented API fetches and updates content as Markdown
- Collaborative documents with real-time co-editing, version restore, list, board, table and graph views and a large template library anchor authoring scores of 5 to 6
Held against it
- Knowledge governance scores 3 to 4, with no public information on page owners, review dates, approval workflows, read confirmations or stale-content analytics
- Portability and hosting scores 3 to 4, with no public information on a Confluence migration path or a full export with attachments and history
- The captured pricing pages show no per-user price figures, so annual cost cannot be computed from public pages
- No public information on SCIM or LDAP provisioning, directory group sync or enforced two-factor authentication
- No public information on a published data processing agreement, security certifications, or the AI model provider behind Sidekick
Best for
- You need a team wiki with workspace-level roles, private workspaces, groups and SAML single sign-on via ADFS or Microsoft Entra ID
- You want Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor to search, read and write your knowledge base through a documented MCP server that respects account permissions and is available on all plans
- Your team works in Markdown and wants a documented API to pull and push content for scripts, runbooks and automations
- You want to publish pages as a website on a custom domain
Avoid if
- You need controlled-document governance for a certified quality system; the documented features stop at version restore, a team-event log and contributor insights, and we found no public information on page owners, review dates or approval workflows
- You must compute an annual cost from public pages before committing; the captured pricing pages show Free, Starter and Business tiers with support levels but no per-user price figures
- You administer hundreds of staff through directory sync and enforced two-factor; the documented controls are SAML single sign-on and workspace permissions, and we found no public information on provisioning or enforced two-factor
- You need a documented Confluence migration path or self-hosting for long-lived archives; the terms describe a cloud software-as-a-service, and imports are described only as "several common formats and tools"
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Editor, structure & search | 3 of 5 |
| Verification, ownership & freshness | 2 of 5 |
| Permissions, SSO & administration | 3 of 5 |
| Help-center publishing & integrations | 3 of 5 |
| Import, export & self-hosting | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 2 of 5 |
Verification, ownership & freshness
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the content stays true: page owners or experts named per page, verification with a review date and a reminder when it lapses, approval or publishing workflows with drafts and reviewers, read confirmations for mandatory pages, analytics on views, searches without a result and stale pages, duplicate detection, archiving rules, and an audit trail of who changed and approved what.
0 — No way to see who owns a page or when it was last checked beyond the edit date.
3 — Page history and last-edited dates; owners, verification, approvals and content analytics are basic or not described.
5 — An owner or verifier per page, a review interval with reminders, a draft and publish step, page view statistics, and archived pages kept out of search.
8 — Approval workflows with several reviewers, read confirmations for mandatory pages, analytics on failed searches and stale content, duplicate or outdated content flagged automatically, and an exportable audit trail of changes and approvals.
10 — Governance that a regulated organisation runs on: controlled documents with versioned approvals that meet a named standard (ISO 9001, GxP), expiry and review enforced per space, knowledge gaps reported from searches and AI questions, and every published statement traceable to an approved version.
The Operations Lead
What is described is history and insight: earlier versions can be restored, a team-event log gives more control and insights into important team events, and team insights show popular content and active contributors. We found no public information on my must-have, a named owner per page, nor on review dates, approval steps, read confirmations or stale-page flagging. 2 14
The IT Administrator
The evidence covers version history with restore, an audit log described only as insights into important team events, and team insights naming active contributors and popular content. We found no public information on page owners, review intervals with reminders, approval or publishing workflows, read confirmations or stale-content analytics — nothing here my auditor would treat as a controlled document process. 2 14
The Support Knowledge Manager
Version history with restore is evidenced through the actions AI tools can perform, and team insights surface popular content and active contributors alongside an audit log of important team events. Beyond that we found no public information on page owners, verification with review dates and reminders, approval workflows, read confirmations or analytics on failed searches and stale pages — so nothing that would nag the right expert when a support article drifts out of date. 2 14
The Engineering Lead
Version restore is confirmed through the MCP documentation, and the product pages mention an audit log of team events plus team insights into active contributors and popular content. We found no public information on per-page owners, verification with review dates, approval or draft-to-publish workflows, read confirmations, or stale-content and duplicate analytics, so this falls well short of the controlled-document governance a regulated team runs on. 2 3 14
The Quality Manager
This is the gap for a certified quality system: version history with restore and a team audit log described only as insights into "important team events" are documented, and team insights name active contributors and popular content. We found no public information on page owners or verifiers, review dates with reminders, approval workflows with named reviewers, read confirmations for mandatory pages, stale-content or duplicate detection, or an exportable audit trail of changes and approvals. 2 3 14
The Skeptic
What passes for governance here is a version history the MCP pages let an assistant restore, an audit log of "important team events", and team insights naming active contributors and popular content. Page owners, review dates with reminders, approval workflows, read confirmations and stale-content analytics are not described on the captured pages, which for a wiki is the thin edge. 2 14
Permissions, SSO & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who may see and edit what, and how the administrator keeps control: roles and permissions per space and per page, restricted or private pages, guest and external access, groups synced from Azure AD/Entra ID, Google Workspace or LDAP, single sign-on (SAML, OIDC), SCIM provisioning, two-factor authentication enforced, an audit log of access and permission changes, and admin controls over sharing and public links. Where the data is hosted and certifications are scored under sovereignty.
0 — Everyone in a workspace sees and edits everything; no permissions of any kind.
3 — Admins, members and guests, or private and shared pages; per-space or per-page rights, SSO and an audit log are basic or not described.
5 — Permissions per space and per page, guest access with limits, single sign-on through Google or Microsoft, two-factor authentication, groups, and admin control over public sharing.
8 — SAML or OIDC single sign-on with any identity provider, SCIM provisioning or LDAP and directory group sync, enforced 2FA, an audit log of views, edits and permission changes, IP or domain restrictions, and permissions honoured by search and AI answers.
10 — Access control an enterprise auditor accepts as documented: granular roles with inheritance explained, just-in-time and external access with expiry, every access and permission change logged and exportable to a SIEM, and the permission model published with its limits.
The Operations Lead
Roles and permissions are configured at workspace level with private workspaces and groups, SAML-based single sign-on is offered with ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID documented, two-factor authentication exists, admins can restrict public sharing and export, and the AI connections respect account permissions. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, LDAP or directory group sync, organisation-wide enforced two-factor authentication, or what the audit log records. 2 3 4 13 14
The IT Administrator
SAML-based single sign-on with ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID, workspace-level roles, access and editing restrictions, private workspaces, guests and read-only members, two-factor authentication, groups, and admin restrictions on public sharing and export are all documented, and the AI connection is stated to see only content the account has access to. We found no public information on directory group sync, SCIM or LDAP provisioning, enforced two-factor authentication or IP restrictions — group sync from Entra ID is exactly what I need for 900 staff, so this stops short of enterprise grade. 2 4 13 14 15
The Support Knowledge Manager
Roles and permissions with reading and editing restrictions are configurable at workspace level, with private workspaces, groups, SAML single sign-on via Active Directory Federation Services and Microsoft Entra ID, two-factor authentication, and admin controls restricting public sharing and export. Crucially, AI tools only see the content the connected account has access to. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, directory group sync, enforced two-factor authentication, IP restrictions or an audit log of permission changes. 2 3 4 13 14 15
The Engineering Lead
Workspace-level roles, access and editing restrictions, groups, private workspaces, SAML-based single sign-on including via Active Directory and Entra ID, two-factor authentication and admin restrictions on public sharing and export are documented, and the MCP pages state AI tools only see content the account can access. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning or directory group sync, enforced two-factor, IP or domain restrictions, or an audit log of permission changes, so it stops short of what an enterprise auditor asks for. 2 3 4 13 14
The Quality Manager
SAML-based single sign-on with ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID configurable in team settings, two-factor authentication, groups, roles and permissions at workspace level with access and editing restrictions, administrator limits on public sharing and export, and AI connectors that respect the account's permissions are all documented. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, LDAP or directory group sync, enforced 2FA, IP or domain restrictions, or precisely what the audit log records. 2 3 4 13 14
The Skeptic
Workspace-level roles with read and edit control, private workspaces, groups, SAML single sign-on through ADFS and Microsoft Entra ID, two-factor authentication, admin restriction of public sharing and export, and AI tools that only see what the account may see are all public. What an auditor would ask next is missing from the captures: SCIM or LDAP provisioning, enforcement of two-factor authentication, and an audit log that names views and permission changes rather than "important team events". 2 3 4 13 14
Help-center publishing & integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How knowledge reaches people outside the editor: public or password-protected sites and help centers with a custom domain, branding and SEO controls, an in-app widget or contextual help, ticket deflection in a help desk, multilingual publishing, integrations with Slack, Microsoft Teams, Jira, Google Drive, help desks and CRMs, a browser extension, a documented REST or GraphQL API, webhooks, and an MCP server or connector for AI assistants.
0 — Content cannot be shared beyond the editor and nothing connects to it.
3 — Sharing a page by public link and a few integrations such as Slack; a branded help center, an API and webhooks are basic or not described.
5 — A published site or help center with custom domain and branding, integrations with Slack or Teams and Google Drive or Microsoft 365, a documented API, and embeds of common tools.
8 — A help center with SEO controls, multilingual publishing, access for logged-in customers and analytics, a widget or contextual help inside the customer's product, help desk integration with ticket deflection, webhooks, and a connector or MCP server for AI assistants.
10 — Knowledge delivered wherever it is needed from one source: internal and public audiences served from the same pages with per-audience rules, a complete API with SDKs and rate limits stated, a marketplace of integrations, and every channel measured in one report.
The Operations Lead
Content can be published as a website with a custom domain, the API is documented and moves content as Markdown, and the MCP server — available on all plans — lets Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor and other assistants search, read and write with permissions respected. We found no public information on which tools the ready-made integrations cover beyond Active Directory single sign-on, nor on SEO controls, multilingual publishing, help-desk deflection or webhooks. 4 6 14 15
The IT Administrator
Publishing to a website with a custom domain and a documented Markdown API are evidenced, and the MCP server is unusually well described with OAuth 2.0, permission scoping, revocation and named clients including Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code and Windsurf. We found no public information on named integrations with Slack, Teams, Jira or Google Drive, webhooks, a help center with SEO controls, or multilingual publishing. 3 4 6 14
The Support Knowledge Manager
Publishing items as a website on a custom domain is documented, a documented Markdown API can search, push and pull content, and a no-code MCP server — available on all plans — connects Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code and Windsurf with permission-aware search, read and write. For a support operation like mine the omissions matter: we found no public information on help-centre SEO controls, multilingual publishing, an in-product widget or contextual help, help-desk ticket deflection, webhooks, or any named Slack, Teams, Drive or CRM integration beyond the Active Directory single sign-on app. 2 4 6 14 15
The Engineering Lead
Publishing to a website with a custom domain appears on the pricing page, the API is documented for searching, reading and writing Markdown content, and the MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor is documented in real depth and available on all plans. We found no public information on webhooks, on named integrations with Slack, Teams, Jira or Google Drive, on help-desk or ticket-deflection flows, or on SEO and multilingual publishing — for generating runbook pages from the pipeline, the absent webhook story matters to me. 2 4 6 13 14 15
The Quality Manager
Publishing pages as a website on a custom domain, a documented Markdown API for search, reading and writing content, ready-made integrations, and a well-documented MCP server working with Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code and Windsurf over OAuth 2.0, revocable from the profile and available on all plans, are all evidenced. We found no public information on SEO controls, multilingual publishing, help desk integration with ticket deflection, an in-app widget, or webhooks. 4 6 14 15
The Skeptic
Publishing items as a website on a custom domain is public, the API is documented and can pull and push Markdown, and the MCP server — Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, permissions respected — is the best-documented thing on the site. But external publishing stops at "publish as website": the captured pages describe nothing of SEO controls, multilingual publishing, a widget or webhooks, and beyond Active Directory we found no public information on named integrations such as Slack, Teams or Drive. 4 6 13 14 15
Import, export & self-hosting
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What arriving and leaving would cost: import from Confluence, Notion, Google Docs, Word and Markdown with structure, attachments and links kept, a full export of every space in an open format (Markdown, HTML, XML, PDF) with attachments and history, an API that reaches all content, a stated migration path from Confluence Server or Data Center, open-source code under a named licence, and a self-hosted or on-premise edition with its own documentation.
0 — Content cannot be imported or exported; it can only be read in the vendor's interface.
3 — Single pages export to PDF or Word and some files can be imported; a full export, a Confluence import and self-hosting are basic or not described.
5 — Import from Confluence or Notion and from Word or Markdown, a full workspace export to Markdown or HTML with attachments, a documented API covering pages, and a stated retention of data after cancellation.
8 — A Confluence migration tool or service that keeps hierarchy, permissions and attachments, a full export with history in an open format, a self-hosted or on-premise edition with installation and update documentation, and data returned or deleted on termination under stated terms.
10 — The customer owns the content end to end: open-source code under a named licence that runs fully self-hosted with feature parity stated, a complete export another tool can import without loss, and the deletion of every copy on termination documented.
The Operations Lead
Import from several common formats and tools and export from within the service are confirmed, the help centre documents an import and export section, and the API fetches and updates content as Markdown. We found no public information on a Confluence migration path, a full workspace export with attachments and history, or any self-hosted or open-source edition. 3 6 7 9
The IT Administrator
The help center carries an import and export section, imports from several common formats and tools are mentioned without naming Confluence, and the API can push and pull content as Markdown. We found no public information on a Confluence migration path that keeps hierarchy, permissions and attachments, a full export with attachments and history, or any self-hosted edition — the terms describe a cloud software-as-a-service with all data stored in the cloud — and for twelve years of pages that is the whole question. 3 6 7 9 11
The Support Knowledge Manager
A documented Import & Export section exists in the help centre, imports from several common formats and tools are supported, the API can fetch and update content as Markdown, and users can delete or replace content at any time. We found no public information on a Confluence or Notion migration path, a full workspace export with attachments and history in an open format, or any self-hosted edition — the terms describe a pure software-as-a-service. 3 6 7 9 11
The Engineering Lead
The help centre carries an import and export section, imports from several common formats and tools are mentioned, and the API can pull every item as Markdown, which is enough for me to script an exit myself. We found no public information on a Confluence migration path, on a full export including attachments and history, or on a self-hosted or open-source edition, so both arriving and leaving cost more than I want after two moves. 3 6 7 9 11
The Quality Manager
Imports from "several common formats and tools", an in-service export of "certain information", an import and export section in the help centre, and an API that pulls and pushes content as Markdown are stated. We found no public information on a Confluence migration, a full workspace export with attachments, or any self-hosted edition — the service is described as a cloud software-as-a-service offering. 3 6 7 9
The Skeptic
The privacy policy promises you can "export certain information from within the Service" — I have lived through that sentence before — imports are "from several common formats and tools" with not one source named, and the API can pull and push content as Markdown. A help-center section on import and export exists, but nothing captured says what a full export contains or whether attachments and history survive it, or what happens to data after cancellation; the service is described as software-as-a-service only, and we found no public information on self-hosting or an open-source edition. 3 6 7 9 11
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where pages, attachments and search indexes are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, CDN, search, email, support, payment, and the AI model provider that reads pages for answers and summaries, with whether content is used for training). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; a wiki holds internal processes, customer data and trade secrets, so the whole chain counts, not only the database. A self-hosted 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 data residency available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (CDN, search, email, support, AI model) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard, or EU residency is limited to the higher tiers.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations including the AI model provider, no training on customer content stated, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated — or a self-hosted edition documented that keeps every page on the customer's own servers.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor including AI, 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 Operations Lead
Nuclino GmbH is registered in Grünwald near Munich under German law and publishes a dated subprocessor list naming Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg and Heroku, both with data location Europe. The chain is not closed: the privacy policy reserves transferring and storing information wherever Nuclino or its providers operate, and we found no public information on the AI provider behind Sidekick, training on customer content, a data processing agreement, or security certifications. 8 9 10 11
The IT Administrator
Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald, registered at the Munich local court and contracting under German law with Munich jurisdiction, publishes a subprocessor list with a change date, naming Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg and Heroku, a United States company, both with data location Europe. We found no public information on the AI model provider behind Sidekick in the captured subprocessor entries, a published data processing agreement, security certifications, or a statement that customer content is not used for training — the model reading my pages is the first thing the works council and the regulator will ask about. 8 9 10 11
The Support Knowledge Manager
The contracting entity is Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald, Germany under German law with Munich jurisdiction, and a published, dated subprocessor list names Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg and Heroku with data location Europe for both. The captured pages give different signals on where data may sit: the privacy policy reserves transferring and storing information outside the customer's country wherever the providers operate, while the subprocessor list places both listed providers in Europe. We found no public information on the AI model provider behind Sidekick, whether content trains it, a published data processing agreement, or security certifications. 8 9 10 11
The Engineering Lead
The contracting entity is Nuclino GmbH in Grünwald with a Munich commercial register number, German law and Munich jurisdiction are stated, and a published subprocessor page names AWS EMEA in Luxembourg and Heroku with data locations in Europe. We found no public information on a published data processing agreement, on security certifications, or on the AI model provider behind Sidekick within the subprocessor chain, so the end-to-end chain a wiki of internal processes and trade secrets needs is only partly evidenced. 8 9 10 11
The Quality Manager
Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald with German governing law and Munich jurisdiction is clear, and a published, dated subprocessor list names two cloud providers both recorded with data location Europe, which is a solid start. However the privacy policy states data is transferred and stored wherever Nuclino or its providers operate, and we found no public information on a data processing agreement, security certifications, whether customer content trains AI models, or which AI model provider reads pages for the Sidekick features. 8 9 10 11
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Nuclino GmbH of Grünwald under German law with Munich jurisdiction, and the subprocessor page names Amazon Web Services EMEA SARL in Luxembourg and Heroku, Inc., a US company, both with data location Europe. But the captured list stops at two cloud providers — the model behind the vendor's own AI assistant, plus email, support and payment, are not on it — the privacy policy reserves transfers "to wherever we, Nuclino or our third-party service providers operate", and we found no public information on a data processing agreement, a no-training statement or certifications. 8 9 10 11
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per user and tier, readers or guests free or charged, minimum seats, which features (SSO, SCIM, audit log, verification, help-center publishing, custom domain, AI answers, EU data residency) cost extra, the free tier and its limits, storage limits, the self-hosted edition's licence and support price, minimum term and setup or migration fees.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with users, readers or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per user and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, AI, readers or guests, EU residency, the self-hosted edition) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (editors, readers, guests, storage), add-ons priced, the self-hosted edition's licence and support cost stated, minimum seats, term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of editors and readers and a feature set, with every add-on, AI credit, setup, migration and support fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Operations Lead
A free plan, monthly or yearly billing, prices excluding VAT, auto-renewal with a two-week notice period and termination by email are published, and the pricing page states plainly that guests and read-only members count as users and upgrading covers the whole team — the exact scaling rule I need, though it means the workshop's read access is charged like everyone else's. The captured pricing pages show no per-user figures for the paid tiers, and we found no public information on storage limits, minimum seats or which features cost extra. 4 11 14
The IT Administrator
A free plan, monthly or yearly paid billing, VAT excluded from stated amounts, auto-renewal with a maximum of one year and two weeks' notice, MCP on all plans, and a clear rule that every user including guests and read-only members counts toward the paid team are all public. We found no public information on the per-user price of each tier, which features such as single sign-on or the audit log sit in which plan, storage limits or minimum seats, so I cannot compute an annual cost for 900 staff from these pages. 4 11 14
The Support Knowledge Manager
A free plan and paid tiers exist with monthly or yearly billing, VAT excluded, automatic renewal capped at a year with a two-week notice period, and the counting rule is admirably explicit: a user is anyone on the team including guests and read-only members, and the whole team upgrades together. But the captured pricing page shows tiers and support levels without any price per user, and we found no public information on storage limits or what single sign-on, AI or other add-ons cost, so a real annual cost cannot be computed from public pages alone. 4 11 14
The Engineering Lead
A free plan, monthly and yearly billing, amounts stated without VAT, two-week cancellation notice and auto-renewal terms are public, and the pricing page defines a user as everyone including guests and read-only members, with the whole team upgrading together. No per-user price figures were captured for the Free, Starter and Business tiers, so I cannot compute our annual cost from these pages. 4 11 14
The Quality Manager
A free tier, monthly and yearly paid plans, amounts stated without VAT, auto-renewal with two weeks' cancellation notice, and a user definition that counts guests and read-only members as billed users are published. The captured pricing page shows tier names and support levels, but we found no public price per user, storage limits, seat minimums, or add-on pricing such as SSO, so the real annual cost cannot be computed from the pages we read. 4 11 14
The Skeptic
The free tier, monthly and yearly billing, VAT-exclusive amounts and the two-week cancellation rule are published, and the user definition is at least honest: a user is anyone who joins the team, guests and read-only members included, and upgrading means upgrading everyone. But no per-user figure appears in the captured pricing page, and storage limits, seat minimums and which tier buys single sign-on or the AI are not described there, so the real annual cost is not computable from what I read. 4 11
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 ⚠ unverified | — | 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 Nuclino
Is Nuclino European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Nuclino as EU-Made.
Where does Nuclino store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Nuclino have a free plan?
Yes. Nuclino has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Nuclino?
As of 1 Nov 2026, the panel rates Document360 (3.5/5), BookStack (3/5) and XWiki (3/5) highest among the other 13 Knowledge Base & Wiki 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 Document360 (UK / wider Europe). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Nuclino 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 — Hosting location, Hosting options, Legal entity. 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.
- 12 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 data fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 product 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 subprocessors 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
- 3 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (15)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (team wiki) www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Pricing page www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Security page www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 API documentation www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Help center help.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Legal notice www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Privacy policy www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Subprocessor list www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Terms of service www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Editor, structure & search — found from sitemap www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Permissions, SSO & administration — found from sitemap www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Help-center publishing & integrations — found from sitemap www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Help-center publishing & integrations — found from sitemap www.nuclino.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →