Lead Generation
Waalaxy
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Waalaxy SAS · www.waalaxy.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.
Waalaxy at a glance
- Vendor
- Waalaxy SAS
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Waalaxy 1/5, the mean of 6 judges. Waalaxy, published by SAS Waapi of Montpellier, France, is an outreach product — LinkedIn Auto-Prospecting, an Email Finder, Cold Emailing and a LinkedIn Inbox. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Waalaxy, published by SAS Waapi of Montpellier, France, is an outreach product — LinkedIn Auto-Prospecting, an Email Finder, Cold Emailing and a LinkedIn Inbox. Its strongest scoring is CRM sync and export, where scores cluster at 4–5: native two-way sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, an inbound Salesforce connector, a documented API and Zapier and Make — though we found no public information on field mapping, deduplication or what happens to data after cancellation. Sovereignty scores cluster at 4 with one 5: a French contracting entity and applications hosted by Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg, weighed against no public information on a data processing agreement or subprocessor list and a website hosted by Vercel Inc. in the United States. It is weakest on data provenance and visitor identification, both topping out at 0, and data coverage scores 0–2 with no published record counts, country figures, verification or refresh cadence. The flagged disagreements, on CRM sync and sovereignty, set a 5 above the 4 cluster and one judge scoring 0 throughout; the only published pricing fact is a 14-day free trial.
Speaks for it
- Native two-way sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, plus a documented API, Zapier (5,000+ tools) and Make
- Inbound connectors from Apollo, Lusha, Clay, Salesforce, Attio and GetProspect for teams that bring their own lead lists
- Applications hosted by Amazon Web Services EMEA SARL in Luxembourg under a French publisher, SAS Waapi, registered with the RCS of Montpellier 841124001
- LinkedIn Auto-Prospecting and Cold Emailing are documented core capabilities, an active outreach workflow rather than a passive contact store
Held against it
- Data provenance tops out at 0: no public information on data sources, legal basis, or an opt-out route for the people in the data
- Data coverage scores run 0–2, with no published record counts, country or DACH figures, verification or refresh cadence
- No public information on a data processing agreement or a subprocessor list, and the website is hosted by Vercel Inc. in the United States
- No public information on field mapping, deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, or data handling after cancellation
- No public information on search filters, suppression lists or EU cold-outreach guidance, leaving the outreach's legal risk with the buyer
Best for
- You run LinkedIn and cold-email outreach against a CRM — native two-way HubSpot and Pipedrive sync with API, Zapier and Make earned the bench's 4–5 cluster on CRM sync and export
- Your team already builds lists in Apollo, Clay, Lusha or GetProspect and needs automated sequencing rather than data sourcing
- You want a European contracting entity and application hosting on AWS EMEA in Luxembourg documented before signature
Avoid if
- You need website visitor identification or intent signals — the documented capabilities describe an outreach tool, and visitor identification topped out at 0
- Your evaluation requires published database size, DACH coverage or verification rates — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You cannot contract without a data processing agreement or subprocessor list — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your compliance review needs documented suppression or do-not-contact handling for EU contacts — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Coverage, accuracy & freshness | 0.5 of 5 |
| Data sources & lawful basis | 0 of 5 |
| Visitor identification & intent signals | 0 of 5 |
| Prospecting workflow & outreach rules | 1 of 5 |
| CRM sync, enrichment & export | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
Coverage, accuracy & freshness
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How much of the target market the database actually covers — judged on DACH and EU coverage as much as North American — and what the vendor documents about verification and refresh, because accuracy claims cannot be checked from outside.
0 — Not a data product: the tool supplies no contact or company data and only manages leads the customer brings.
3 — Total record counts for the database with the data types offered (email, phone, company data) and email verification mentioned.
5 — Coverage stated by country or region with Europe or DACH included, email verification described, firmographics beyond name and domain (industry, size, revenue), and a refresh cadence or last-verified date stated.
8 — Coverage broken down by country, industry and data type (email, direct dial, mobile), verification method and refresh cadence documented, company data drawn from official registers where available, and a bounce or credit-back guarantee with stated terms.
10 — The vendor is accountable for its data: per-country coverage and accuracy methodology published, every field carrying a last-verified date visible to the user, register-sourced company data, and credit-back terms that make inaccuracy the vendor's cost rather than the buyer's.
The SDR Team Lead
The listed capabilities include an email finder alongside LinkedIn automation and cold email, but I found no public information on database size, coverage by country or data type, email verification, or any refresh cadence. I cannot plan a territory or estimate bounce risk from anything on the captured pages. 2
The RevOps Manager
The legal notice lists an Email Finder among the product's capabilities, so it does supply contact data rather than only managing leads the customer brings. We found no public information on record counts, coverage by country or region, email verification, refresh cadence or firmographics, so I cannot judge DACH or EU coverage from the captured pages at all. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages present an Email Finder and cold-email capability, so contact data is supplied, but I found no public information on record volumes, coverage by country or region, verification methods, or any refresh cadence. A buyer has nothing here to judge DACH or EU coverage or accuracy against. 1 2
The ABM Marketer
The vendor lists an Email Finder among four capabilities, so contact data is supplied, but we found no public information on database size, country or DACH coverage, verification, or refresh cadence. Working a fixed list of target accounts, I cannot tell from these pages how much of my market they could actually cover. 1 2
The DACH Sales Director
An Email Finder appears in the published capability list, so the product does supply contact data, but that two-word mention is all we get: no record counts, no coverage by country — I search in vain for any Germany, Austria or Switzerland figure — and nothing on email verification or refresh. 1 2
The Skeptic
An Email Finder sits among the product's four stated capabilities, so this is a data-supplying tool — but that is the whole of the documentation. We found no public information on record counts, coverage by country or region including DACH, email verification, or any refresh cadence, so there is nothing here to hold the vendor to. 2
Data sources & lawful basis
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
n/r
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the personal data in the database comes from and on what legal basis it is processed — as evidenced on the vendor's own pages. Covers Art. 6(1)(f) legitimate interest, the Art. 14 notice to the people in the database, and whether they can find, object to and remove their record.
0 — The vendor states that it leaves the legal basis for the personal data it sells entirely to the buyer, or that records are collected without the people in them being able to object.
3 — Sources described in general terms (public sources, partners), a GDPR legal basis named, and an opt-out or removal route for people in the database.
5 — Source categories named (registers, company websites, contributory networks, licensed partners), legitimate interest under Art. 6(1)(f) stated as the basis for EU records, a privacy notice addressed to the people in the database, and a self-service opt-out or removal process.
8 — The above plus an Art. 14 notification practice described (people informed when added), contributory or browser-extension collection disclosed as such, a legitimate-interest assessment summarised publicly, and EU records handled differently from US records where the law differs.
10 — Provenance is traceable per record: the source and collection date available for each contact, Art. 14 notices sent and documented, the balancing test published, objections honoured across the whole dataset and suppressed permanently, and no data sourced by scraping behind logins or from contributors' address books without their contacts' knowledge.
The SDR Team Lead
The integrations page shows contacts arriving inbound from Apollo, Lusha, GetProspect and similar providers, which suggests the buyer largely brings the data themselves. Beyond that I found no public information on the sources behind the email finder, a GDPR legal basis, a notice to the people found, or an opt-out or removal route for them. 3 2
The RevOps Manager not rated — no public information
We found no public information on where the contact data behind the Email Finder comes from, the legal basis it is processed under, or any route for the people in the data to be informed, object or be removed. The homepage, legal notice and both integrations pages we read cover hosting, corporate details and connectors, not data sourcing. 1 2 3 4
The Data Protection Officer not rated — no public information
I found no public information on where the contact data originates, the GDPR legal basis claimed for it, a privacy notice addressed to the people in the database, or any opt-out and removal route for them. The legal notice I read covers the publishing entity and general terms only; since the customer becomes controller on export, this silence is the single most serious gap. 1 2
The ABM Marketer not rated — no public information
We found no public information on where the email finder's contact data comes from, the legal basis it is processed on, or any opt-out and removal route for the people in it. The homepage and legal notice I read cover the company and its hosting, not data sourcing. 1 2
The DACH Sales Director not rated — no public information
We found no public information on where the contact data comes from, on what legal basis it is processed, or how someone in the database can object or have their record removed; the legal notices cover the publisher and hosting, not data sources. 1 2
The Skeptic not rated — no public information
We found no public information on where the personal data comes from, the legal basis it is processed on, or any opt-out route for the people in the database. The legal notice we read names the publisher, hosting and terms of sale, and goes no further; given this product automates outreach to people who never chose the vendor, that silence is the loudest fact on the pages. 1 2
Visitor identification & intent signals
n/r
n/r
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Identifying companies behind website visits and surfacing buying intent — scored on what is identified (company or person), how the tracking works, and whether the vendor states that its script needs consent under §25 TDDDG and how it behaves without it.
0 — No visitor identification or intent data; the product does not look at website visits.
3 — Reverse-IP identification of the companies behind website visits through a tracking script, with visits listed per company.
5 — Company-level identification with filters and visit history per company, alerts or CRM handover of identified companies, and a stated position on consent for the script or a consent-mode option.
8 — Company-level only for EU traffic by design, cookieless operation documented, integration with common consent management platforms and the §25 TDDDG position stated, intent topics or page-level signals with the source of third-party intent data named, and alerts routed to owners.
10 — Identification that survives a DPO review: no personal data of visitors stored, the TDDDG and GDPR position published and specific, third-party intent data sourced from a named co-op or panel with its consent basis stated, and scoring on intent that the user can trace back to the underlying visits.
The SDR Team Lead
The documented capabilities are LinkedIn auto-prospecting, email finder, cold emailing and a LinkedIn inbox — an outreach tool rather than a website-analytics one. I found no public information on identifying companies behind website visits or on intent signals. 2
The RevOps Manager not rated — no public information
We found no public information on identifying companies behind website visits or on intent signals; the captured pages position the product around LinkedIn auto-prospecting, email finding and cold emailing, with nothing on website tracking, a consent position for a script, or third-party intent data. 1 2 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
The documented capability set is LinkedIn auto-prospecting, email finding, cold emailing and inbox management — an outreach tool of a different kind from a website-visitor product. I found no public information on company identification behind website visits, intent signals, or any consent position for a tracking script. 2 1
The ABM Marketer
The vendor's own capability list is LinkedIn Auto-Prospecting, Email Finder, Cold Emailing and LinkedIn Inbox — a different kind of tool from website visitor identification — and we found no public information on identifying companies behind site visits, intent topics with a named source, or alerts reaching account owners. For my question of which accounts are in market, this is a hard stop. 1 2
The DACH Sales Director
The documented capabilities — LinkedIn auto-prospecting, email finding, cold emailing, LinkedIn inbox — describe an outreach tool of a different kind, and we found no public information on identifying companies behind website visits, on intent signals, or on any position regarding consent for a tracking script. 2
The Skeptic not rated — no public information
We found no public information on website visitor identification or intent signals of any kind. The product's stated capabilities are LinkedIn auto-prospecting, an email finder, cold emailing and a LinkedIn inbox — no captured page mentions looking at website visits, reverse-IP lookups, or a consent position for a tracking script. 1 2
Prospecting workflow & outreach rules
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Search, list building and outreach — and whether the product helps the buyer stay within UWG §7 and the GDPR once the list exists, rather than leaving the legal risk entirely with the customer.
0 — No search, list building or outreach; the product only stores leads entered or captured elsewhere.
3 — Search with filters on firmographics and job title, saved lists, and export of the contacts found.
5 — Advanced filters (technographics, hiring or funding triggers), saved searches with alerts, a suppression or do-not-contact list, and guidance on GDPR or cold-outreach rules for EU contacts.
8 — Country-aware handling (for example German contacts flagged where cold calls and emails require consent under UWG §7), phone numbers checked against national do-not-call registers where they exist, and opt-outs from outreach synced back to the database.
10 — Compliance is part of the workflow: outreach channels restricted or flagged per country and contact type by default, suppression shared across the whole account and every export, the Art. 14 notice supported at first contact, and a documented record of how each contact entered the buyer's pipeline.
The SDR Team Lead
Automated outreach on LinkedIn and email is the documented core of the product, with leads arriving via inbound connectors from other tools. But I found no public information on search filters, saved lists, a suppression or do-not-contact list, or any guidance on cold-outreach consent rules for EU contacts. 2 3
The RevOps Manager
This is squarely an outreach product — the capabilities list names LinkedIn Auto-Prospecting and Cold Emailing — so it does far more than store leads the customer brings. We found no public information on search filters, saved lists, export of contacts, do-not-contact suppression or any guidance on German or EU cold-outreach rules, which leaves the legal risk sitting entirely with the buyer so far as the evidence goes. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Automated LinkedIn prospecting and cold emailing are documented, but I found no public information on do-not-contact suppression, country-aware handling of German or EU contacts under the cold-outreach consent rules, or any guidance on lawful basis for outreach. On the captured pages the legal risk of the outreach sits entirely with the customer. 2 1
The ABM Marketer
Automated LinkedIn and cold-email outreach is the product's documented core, but we found no public information on search filters, saved lists, export of found contacts, a do-not-contact list, or any guidance on UWG §7 and GDPR cold-outreach rules for EU contacts. The outreach muscle is real; the guardrails are invisible on these pages. 2
The DACH Sales Director
Automated LinkedIn prospecting and cold emailing are documented as the core of the product, which is more than a contact store, but no search filters, saved lists, export rules or any guidance on UWG §7 or GDPR for EU contacts are documented; the only list-building evidence is inbound connectors from third-party data tools. 2 3
The Skeptic
Outreach is the product — LinkedIn auto-prospecting and cold emailing are its stated capabilities — so this is an active prospecting workflow, not a passive store. But we found no public information on search filters, saved lists, export of contacts found, a do-not-contact list, or any guidance on cold-outreach rules for EU contacts, which leaves the legal risk squarely with the buyer. 1 2
CRM sync, enrichment & export
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting the data into the systems where sales works — CRM sync, enrichment of existing records, API — and what happens to exported data, and to the buyer's access to it, when the subscription ends.
0 — Data can only be viewed inside the product; the vendor states no export and no integration.
3 — CSV export and a push of contacts to at least one named CRM.
5 — Native integrations with the major CRMs (Salesforce, HubSpot or similar) with field mapping or deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, and a documented API.
8 — Bidirectional sync with scheduled re-enrichment, update and deletion propagated when a record changes or a person objects, webhook or API access with stated limits and credit costs per call published, and data retention rights after cancellation stated plainly.
10 — The vendor treats the buyer's CRM as the system of record: objections and corrections propagated into synced records automatically, full change history per field, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, and exit terms that say exactly which data the customer may keep and for how long.
The SDR Team Lead
Native two-way sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, inbound connectors from Salesforce, Clay, Attio and others, Zapier to 5,000+ tools, and public API documentation are all clearly documented. I found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, or what happens to the data when the subscription ends. 3 2 4
The RevOps Manager
Native two-way integrations with HubSpot and Pipedrive, an inbound Salesforce connector, a documented API and Zapier or Make for everything else — that is genuine CRM connectivity. We found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, enrichment of existing records, scheduled re-enrichment, or what data we may keep after cancelling, which is exactly what I need to see before anything syncs into my CRM. 2 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
Native two-way sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, an inbound connection set, a documented API and Zapier access are shown. I found no public information on field mapping or deduplication, on propagating corrections or objections into synced records, or on the buyer's data and access rights after cancellation. 3 4 2
The ABM Marketer
Native two-way sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, inbound connectors from Apollo, Clay, Lusha, Salesforce and others, plus a documented API with Zapier and Make support, gets data moving into where sales works. We found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, or what happens to exported data when the subscription ends. 2 3 4
The DACH Sales Director
Native two-way integrations with HubSpot and Pipedrive, an inbound Salesforce connector, a documented API and Zapier and Make give it genuine CRM reach; we found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, sync scheduling, or what happens to the buyer's data when the subscription ends. 3 4
The Skeptic
Two-way native sync with HubSpot and Pipedrive, a documented API, Zapier and Make, and a dozen inbound connectors (Apollo, Lusha, Clay, Salesforce and others) put real plumbing on the record. We found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, scheduled re-enrichment, propagation of updates or objections into synced systems, API rate limits or credit costs, or what happens to exported data when the subscription ends. 2 3 4
European sovereignty
panel opinion
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where a database of EU residents' personal data is held, who the contracting entity and controller are, and which subprocessors see it. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted heavily here, because the product itself is personal data about people who never chose the vendor.
0 — Vendor, contracting entity and processing of EU residents' contact data all shown to be outside the EU, with no transfer basis stated.
3 — A named contracting entity and a privacy policy or data processing agreement; a non-EU entity with an EU representative under Art. 27, or EU hosting offered while the hosting location of the database is not stated.
5 — EU hosting stated as standard, together with an EU contracting entity or a published subprocessor list, and a data processing agreement offered.
8 — EU contracting entity and controller, EU hosting on named infrastructure, subprocessor and data-partner list published, and any non-EU transfer named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, controller, hosting, data partners and every subprocessor European, certification published, and a DPA covering both the customer's data and the database records the customer exports.
The SDR Team Lead
The legal notices name SAS Waapi of Montpellier, France as the publisher (registered with the RCS of Montpellier) and state that the Waalaxy and Waalaxy AI applications are hosted by Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg, while the marketing website is hosted by Vercel Inc. in the United States. I found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, or the legal basis for the US-hosted website. 2
The RevOps Manager
The contracting entity is French — SAS Waapi of Montpellier, registered with the RCS of Montpellier — and the vendor's own legal notice states the applications are hosted by Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg, both solidly European. We found no public information on a data processing agreement, a full subprocessor list beyond the two hosts named, or the transfer basis for the US-hosted marketing site, so it stops short of the stronger levels. 2
The Data Protection Officer
The legal notice names SAS Waapi of Montpellier as the contracting entity and places the Waalaxy applications on Amazon Web Services EMEA infrastructure in Luxembourg — a European entity with European application hosting on named infrastructure. I found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor or data-partner list, or the legal basis for the website's hosting by Vercel Inc. in the United States. 2
The ABM Marketer
The legal notice names the publisher as SAS Waapi with a registered office in Montpellier, France, and places the Waalaxy and Waalaxy AI applications with Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg, while the marketing website itself sits with Vercel in the United States. We found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, or where the database itself is held. 2
The DACH Sales Director
The legal notices name a French publisher, SAS Waapi of Montpellier with full RCS registration, and place both applications on Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg — more European substance than most — but the captured pages show no data processing agreement, no subprocessor list, and the website runs on Vercel in the United States with no transfer basis stated. 2
The Skeptic
The legal notice names SAS Waapi of Montpellier, France as publisher with RCS registration and a French VAT number, and states the Waalaxy and Waalaxy AI applications are hosted by AWS EMEA in Luxembourg — an EU entity on EU infrastructure. We found no public information on a data processing agreement, a subprocessor list, or safeguards for the marketing website, which runs on Vercel in the United States. 2
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 — including credits per email, phone number and mobile, credit expiry, seat pricing, visitor-identification tiers and the API — in a category where the unit of billing is often invented by the vendor.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A public "from" price, a free tier or one priced tier, while what a credit buys or the other tiers are not stated.
5 — Prices public per tier with the billing period and the credits or contacts included per tier; extras such as mobile numbers, additional seats or API access may still be on request.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with credits per data type, credit expiry and rollover, per-seat costs, overage rates, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given number of seats, exported contacts by data type, identified companies and API calls, with every credit cost and the refund rule for inaccurate data published.
The SDR Team Lead
A 14-day free trial is public, but I found no public information on any plan price, credits, seats, or billing periods. I cannot budget a team's annual spend from what is published. 1 4
The RevOps Manager
The only public pricing term we found is a 14-day free trial. We found no public information on tier prices, what any plan or credit buys, seat costs, minimum term or VAT treatment, so no annual cost can be computed from the captured pages. 1 4
The Data Protection Officer
A 14-day free trial is published, but I found no public prices, tier definitions, credit terms per data type, or seat costs on the pages I read. A buyer cannot begin to compute an annual cost from what is captured. 1 4
The ABM Marketer
The only pricing fact we found is a 14-day free trial. No tiers, prices, credits or seat costs appear on the pages read, so I cannot begin to compute an annual cost from public information. 1 4
The DACH Sales Director
The only pricing information on the captured pages is a 14-day free trial; we found no public prices for any tier, no credit or seat costs, no term or VAT treatment, so a Mittelstand buyer cannot begin to compute an annual cost from what is published. 1 4
The Skeptic
A 14-day free trial is the only pricing fact the captured pages contain. We found no public information on tier prices, what a credit buys per data type, credit expiry, seat costs, minimum term or VAT treatment — so a buyer cannot begin to compute the annual cost from anything published here. 1 4
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 | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | 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 Waalaxy
Is Waalaxy European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Waalaxy is based.
Where does Waalaxy store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
Does Waalaxy have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Waalaxy?
As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Cognism (3/5), Dealfront (3/5) and Vainu (3/5) highest among the other 40 Lead Generation 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 Cognism (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: Waalaxy alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 3 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. 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 found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (waalaxy.com, waalaxy.com/legal-notices, waalaxy.com/integrations, waalaxy.com/integrations/zapier). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 13 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
- 3 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 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
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (4)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.waalaxy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.waalaxy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap www.waalaxy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap www.waalaxy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →