Learning Management (LMS)
Eurekos
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Eurekos Systems ApS · eurekos.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.
Eurekos at a glance
- Vendor
- Eurekos Systems ApS
- 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 Eurekos 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Eurekos Systems ApS, a Danish vendor in Hillerød, sells a multi-tenant LMS for customer, partner and employee training. 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
Eurekos Systems ApS, a Danish vendor in Hillerød, sells a multi-tenant LMS for customer, partner and employee training. The bench scores it strongest on onboarding and academies — a flat 7, minimum and maximum both 7 — on limitless branded learning portals at no additional cost, partner certification with automatic recertification, and QR-code access for learners outside the federation; courses and content follow at 6-7. The weakest finding is pricing transparency, a flat 2: no price per user or tier is public, only a contact form, with the model (active users per month, 12-month auto-renewing term, 90 days' notice) described without figures. Judges genuinely split on sovereignty, 4 to 6: the works council member credits the documented on-premises edition that puts the databases on the customer's own infrastructure, while the lower scores cite pages that never state where the cloud service hosts learner data, an unlisted sub-processor chain and AWS CloudFront video streaming with no region given. Reporting splits 5-6 on works-council needs, where we found no public information on switching off time tracking or pseudonymised reporting.
Speaks for it
- Onboarding and academies scored 7 (minimum and maximum both 7) on limitless branded learning portals, each with its own content catalog, e-commerce, security, integrations and branding, at no additional cost
- Built-in drag-and-drop authoring imports SCORM (all versions) and xAPI, with an offline mobile app and a localization tool covering over 100 languages
- Integration and portability scored 6 (minimum and maximum both 6) on SAML2 and OpenID (OAuth2) single sign-on, an open API reaching HRIS and CRM, and a documented on-premises edition
- ISO/IEC 27001 and 27701 certifications are stated, alongside a standard data processing agreement and EU Commission Standard Contractual Clauses for transfers outside the EU/EEA
- Automatic recertification with notifications and flexible completion criteria backs certifications, with on-demand exports described as "instant proof of compliance for audits"
Held against it
- No public prices — the pricing page promises pricing information after a contact form, so an annual cost cannot be computed from public pages (pricing transparency: minimum and maximum both 2)
- The captured pages never state where the cloud service hosts learner data, and the terms acknowledge sub-processors without listing them by name or location
- We found no public information on policy attestations, course versioning, attendance records or escalation of overdue training to managers, holding compliance training at 4-5
- Accessibility is described only as adherence to accessibility standards with no WCAG version named, and the Saga AI Assistant appears with no explanation of its model or data use
- We found no public information on exporting courses as SCORM or exporting users, completions and certificates, so what leaving would cost is not described on the captured pages
Best for
- You train customers, distributors, resellers and channel partners and need many branded portals with certification and automatic recertification
- Your learners sit outside your federation — contractors and partners who join by manual sign-up or QR-code access
- You want to run the platform on-premises on your own infrastructure, with your own staff handling updates, backup and disaster recovery
- You build courses in many languages and need an offline-capable mobile app for learners
Avoid if
- You must estimate an annual cost from public pages before shortlisting — prices come only after a contact form
- Your audits require policy attestations, course versioning per learner or classroom attendance records, on which we found no public information
- Your works council needs to switch off time tracking or obtain pseudonymised reporting before consenting — we found no public information on either
- You cannot sign without a stated cloud hosting location or a named sub-processor list, neither of which the captured pages provide
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Courses, learning paths & content standards | 3.5 of 5 |
| Compliance training, recertification & audit trail | 2.5 of 5 |
| Onboarding, extended enterprise & academies | 3.5 of 5 |
| Reporting, learner data & works council | 3 of 5 |
| Integrations, administration & portability | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 1 of 5 |
Courses, learning paths & content standards
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How learning is built and delivered: a course builder with video, documents, quizzes and assignments, import of SCORM 1.2 and 2004, xAPI, cmi5 and LTI packages, learning paths with prerequisites, assessments and question pools, certificates, blended learning with classroom or virtual sessions, a mobile app with offline access, multilingual courses and interface, accessibility (WCAG), AI-assisted authoring, and an off-the-shelf content library.
0 — Not a learning management system; courses cannot be delivered or tracked with it.
3 — Courses with video, documents and quizzes and a completion record; content standards, learning paths and mobile use are basic or not described.
5 — A course builder with quizzes and certificates, SCORM import, learning paths with prerequisites, scheduled instructor-led or virtual sessions, a responsive or native mobile app, and courses and interface in several languages.
8 — SCORM, xAPI and cmi5 or LTI documented, question pools and graded assignments, adaptive or branching paths, an offline mobile app, automatic translation of courses, accessibility conformance stated against WCAG 2.1 or 2.2, and AI authoring with the model and data use explained.
10 — A content platform an L&D team runs on: every major standard with a published conformance statement, a learning record store or xAPI export, skills tagged to content, multilingual versions managed as one course, and course content exportable as packages another LMS imports.
The Onboarding Lead
Course authoring is built in with drag-and-drop, SCORM in all versions and xAPI sit side by side, branching scenarios and adaptive modules are documented, the mobile app supports offline learning, and a localization tool covers over 100 languages — that covers a phone-based path for my German, Czech and English starters. What holds it back: we found no public information on question pools or cmi5 and LTI support, accessibility is described only as adherence to accessibility standards without WCAG being named, and the Saga AI Assistant is named without any model or data-use detail. 11 12 15 2 1
The Compliance Officer
The built-in drag-and-drop authoring tool imports SCORM in all versions and xAPI, supports branching scenarios, adaptive modules and blended learning journeys, and the mobile app works offline; courses can be localized into over 100 languages and analytics can be fed to a separate learning record store. We found no public information on WCAG conformance statements, question pools and graded assignments, cmi5 or LTI, and the Saga AI assistant is named without any explanation of the model or its data use. 2 11 12 15 1
The Customer Education Lead
Built-in drag-and-drop authoring with import of SCORM (all versions) and xAPI, branching scenarios and adaptive learning paths, virtual instructor-led training via Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect, an offline mobile app, and a localization tool covering over 100 languages — that is most of what I need to run an academy. What keeps it short of the top: we found no public information on cmi5 or LTI, question pools, WCAG-named accessibility conformance, or the model and data use behind the Saga AI Assistant. 2 11 12 15 1
The Works Council Member
A built-in drag-and-drop authoring tool, import of SCORM in all versions and xAPI, adaptive and branching learning paths, a mobile app with offline learning, and a localization tool covering more than one hundred languages are all documented. Two things hold me back: accessibility is described only as "adherence to accessibility standards" with no WCAG conformance statement, and the Saga AI Assistant is named without any explanation of the model or what happens to the data. 1 2 11 12 15
The IT & HR Systems Admin
A built-in drag-and-drop authoring tool, import of SCORM in all versions and xAPI, branching scenarios and adaptive learning paths, blended Learning Journeys, an offline mobile app, and localisation into over 100 languages cover most of what our L&D team builds with. We found no public information on cmi5 or LTI, question pools or graded assignments, or a content library, accessibility is referenced only as adherence to unnamed 'accessibility standards', and the Saga AI Assistant is named with no model or data-use explanation. 1 2 11 12 15
The Skeptic
A built-in drag-and-drop authoring tool, import of "xAPI, SCORM (all versions)", branching scenarios and adaptive modules, an offline mobile app, and a localisation tool covering over 100 languages are all documented. But the accessibility claim stops at "universal design principles, and adherence to accessibility standards" with no WCAG version named, the Saga AI Assistant appears by name with no explanation of the model or data use, and we found no public information on cmi5 or LTI support, question pools with graded assignments, or an off-the-shelf content library. 11 2 12 15 1
Compliance training, recertification & audit trail
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether mandatory training can be run and proven: automatic assignment by role, department, location or legal entity, due dates with reminders and escalation to the manager, recurring recertification (annual data protection, IT security, anti-money-laundering, occupational safety instruction), attestations and acknowledgements of policies, attendance records for classroom sessions, course versioning with who completed which version, expiry of certificates, and audit-ready reports and exports for regulators or auditors.
0 — No way to assign mandatory training or record completion.
3 — Courses can be assigned with a due date and completions reported; recertification, escalation and audit evidence are basic or not described.
5 — Rule-based assignment by group or attribute, due dates with automatic reminders, recurring recertification with certificate expiry, policy acknowledgements, attendance for live sessions, and completion reports exportable for an audit.
8 — Escalation to managers, course versioning with the completed version stored per learner, an unalterable audit trail, e-signatures or attestations with timestamp, ready-made compliance dashboards by entity and location, and named regimes supported (occupational safety instruction, GxP or 21 CFR Part 11, FINMA or BaFin requirements).
10 — Compliance evidence that holds in an inspection: validated or certified for a named regulated use, every assignment, reminder, attempt and completion traceable to a timestamped record, retention of training records configurable per regulation, and the audit trail exportable in a documented format.
The Onboarding Lead
Automated assignment by predefined rules and profile criteria, automatic recertification with notifications, and on-demand reporting and exports for instant proof of compliance for audits give me the bones of mandatory training. For my world — occupational safety instruction with attestations, course versioning showing who completed which version, escalation to the line manager when a deadline passes, and attendance records — we found no public information on the captured pages. 8 4 2
The Compliance Officer
Assignment can be automated on predefined rules and profile criteria, recertification runs automatically with notifications and flexible completion criteria, and on-demand reporting and exports are described as instant proof of compliance for audits. We found no public information on escalation of overdue training to managers, course versioning showing who completed which version, policy attestations, classroom attendance records, or support for named regimes such as BaFin requirements — exactly the version-per-person evidence my last audit took a week to assemble. 8 4 2 12
The Customer Education Lead
Automated content assignment on predefined rules and profile criteria, automatic recertification with notifications and flexible completion criteria, and on-demand reporting and exports that provide instant proof of compliance for audits — the recertification engine is exactly what my partner certifications that expire need. We found no public information on due dates with manager escalation, policy acknowledgements or attestations, course versioning per learner, or support for a named regulatory regime. 8 4 2
The Works Council Member
Automated content assignment by predefined rules and profile criteria, automatic recertification with notifications and flexible completion criteria, and on-demand reporting and exports described as "instant proof of compliance for audits" cover the core of mandatory training. I found no public information on due-date escalation to managers, course versioning that stores which version each learner completed, an unalterable audit trail, or attestations and policy acknowledgements — the pieces an occupational-safety or data-protection instruction duty is proven with. 2 4 8 15
The IT & HR Systems Admin
Automated content assignment based on predefined rules and profile criteria, automatic recertification with notifications and flexible completion criteria, and on-demand reporting and exports for instant proof of compliance give us the core of mandatory-training evidence. Due dates with reminders, escalation to managers, policy attestations, attendance records and course versioning are not described on the captured pages, so I score the level the evidence reaches. 2 4 8
The Skeptic
Automated content assignment "based on predefined rules and profile criteria", automatic recertification with notifications and flexible completion criteria, and "on-demand reporting and exports that provide instant proof of compliance for audits" cover the core of a mandatory-training programme. We found no public information on policy acknowledgements or attestations, attendance records for live sessions, course versioning, escalation to managers, or any named regulatory regime, so the evidence stops at the middle level. 8 4 2
Onboarding, extended enterprise & academies
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Which audiences the product serves and how much runs without an administrator: onboarding journeys enrolled automatically from the HR system on the start date, manager and buddy tasks, frontline staff without a company email, multiple branded portals or tenants for customers, partners, franchisees or members, self-registration and SSO for external users, selling courses with checkout, subscriptions and coupons, partner certification programmes, and groups, branches and delegated administration.
0 — Serves no organisational audience; a personal course viewer only.
3 — Users can be grouped and enrolled by hand; automated onboarding and external audiences are basic or not described.
5 — Onboarding paths assigned automatically on creation of the user, groups or branches with their own administrators, a branded portal for external learners with self-registration, and either course sales with payment or several portals for different audiences.
8 — Onboarding triggered by HR-system events with manager tasks and checklists, login for frontline staff without email (username, QR code or kiosk), several branded tenants with separate content, reporting and administrators, course sales with subscriptions, bundles and invoices, and partner certification with renewal.
10 — Internal and external learning run from one platform at scale: unlimited tenants with their own domains and data separation stated, e-commerce with VAT handling and accounting integration, onboarding journeys that span HR, IT and the manager, and every audience reported on separately and together.
The Onboarding Lead
Smart onboarding with advanced automation rules and personalized journeys, QR-code access and manual sign-up for people outside our federation (which would matter for shift workers without company email), automatic user provisioning, and unlimited branded portals each with its own content catalog, e-commerce, integrations and branding — the extended-enterprise side is genuinely strong, including partner certification with renewal. What I miss for internal onboarding: we found no public information on manager and buddy tasks or checklists, and sync with an HR system appears as an open API option reaching HRIS rather than a named connector triggered the day HR creates a person. 3 2 8 13 14 4
The Compliance Officer
This is clearly the platform's home ground: smart onboarding with advanced automation rules, limitless branded portals each with its own content catalog, e-commerce, security, integrations and branding at no additional cost, manual sign-up and automatic provisioning for channel partners, QR-code access, and partner certification with automatic recertification. We found no public information on manager tasks and checklists inside onboarding journeys, or on subscriptions, bundles and invoicing details for course sales. 3 13 8 14 2
The Customer Education Lead
This is the strongest area for my use case: limitless branded portals, each with its own content catalog, e-commerce, security, integrations and branding, at no additional cost, in a platform purpose-built for partner training with certification and automatic recertification, self-registration for learners outside my federation, SSO and provisioning from Microsoft, Google, CRM and web portals, QR-code access, and decentralized administration. What holds it back: we found no public information on onboarding triggered by HR-system events with manager tasks and checklists, or on course sales with subscriptions, bundles and invoicing. 13 14 4 8 3 16
The Works Council Member
This platform is built for the people outside our four walls: unlimited branded portals each with their own content catalog, e-commerce, security, integrations and branding at no extra cost, partner certification with automatic recertification, manual sign-up for clients and contractors outside the federation, QR-code access and automatic user provisioning. We found no public information on onboarding triggered by HR-system events with manager tasks and checklists, and the e-commerce is described without detail on subscriptions, bundles or invoicing. 2 3 4 8 13 14
The IT & HR Systems Admin
Unlimited branded portals each with their own content catalog, e-commerce, security and branding at no additional cost, manual sign-up for clients and channel partners outside our federation, QR-code access, automatic user provisioning, and partner certification with automatic recertification make this a real extended-enterprise platform. From my HR seat, onboarding triggered by HR-system events with manager tasks and checklists is not described, and subscriptions, bundles or invoicing for course sales are not detailed. 2 3 5 8 13 14
The Skeptic
This is what the product is built for: "limitless branded learning portals", each with its own content catalog, e-commerce, security, integrations and branding, at no additional cost, plus partner certification with automatic recertification, QR-code access and manual sign-up for users outside the federation, and automation rules for onboarding journeys. The pieces the top level describes that we found no public information on are manager tasks and checklists, onboarding triggered by HR-system events, and course sales with subscriptions, bundles or invoices. 13 14 8 3 4
Reporting, learner data & works council
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the system shows about learning and about each learner, and how far the customer can limit it: dashboards and reports for L&D, managers and auditors, custom and scheduled reports, which learner data is recorded (completions, scores, time spent, logins), role-based visibility so managers see only their team, aggregated or pseudonymised reports, the option to switch off time tracking or scoring, retention and deletion rules, learner access to their own data, and material for a works agreement under §87(1) no. 6 BetrVG or the vendor's description of codetermination. Where the data is processed is scored under sovereignty.
0 — No reports, or individual learner activity shown to every administrator with no settings at all.
3 — Completion and progress reports exist and a privacy policy covers the product; what is recorded per learner and who sees it are basic or not described.
5 — Dashboards and custom reports with scheduled delivery, roles that restrict managers to their own team, the learner data recorded described, retention and deletion of learner records configurable, and a data processing agreement offered.
8 — Granular visibility per role and organisational unit, aggregated or pseudonymised reports for analytics, tracking of time spent or scores that can be switched off, automatic deletion after a set period, a learner data export, and a works council or codetermination guide, template works agreement or data protection impact assessment supplied.
10 — Learner data under the customer's full control and documented as such: every recorded field and every report listed with who can see it, privacy settings per country or entity, an audit log of who viewed learner data, and the codetermination position confirmed by a named works council, law firm or certification.
The Onboarding Lead
Visual, role-tailored dashboards with a role-based analytics permission model — managers and local admins see data pre-filtered to their role and organization, with specific analytics types granted per role — plus configurable automatic user deletion and anonymization and a standard data processing agreement would let me retire the completion spreadsheet. For the works council conversation, though, we found no public information on pseudonymised or aggregated reporting, on switching off time-and-engagement tracking, or on any codetermination guide or works agreement template. 15 16 8 9 10
The Compliance Officer
Visual dashboards track active users, time and engagement, questionnaires, completions and certificates, and a role-based analytics permission system pre-filters what managers and local admins see by role and organisation, with data processing agreements offered. Deletion is partly configurable through automatic user deletion and anonymization at set intervals, and retention periods are stated, but we found no public information on switching off time or score tracking, pseudonymised reports, a learner data export, or works council material under §87(1) no. 6 BetrVG. 15 16 8 9 10
The Customer Education Lead
Interactive role-tailored dashboards track active users, certificates and completions, time and engagement, and skills; analytics permissions grant specific analytics types to a defined role with data pre-filtered by role and organization — solid role-based visibility. Deletion is configurable (automatic user deletion and anonymization at specified intervals), a standard data processing agreement is provided, and retention is stated (system logs one month, statistical data five years after user deletion). We found no public information on pseudonymised reporting, switching off time tracking, a learner self-service data export, or works council and codetermination material. 15 16 8 10 9
The Works Council Member
Analytics permissions pre-filter every dashboard by role and organization so managers see only their slice, and the dashboards measure active users, certificates, progress and — the part that decides my consent — time and engagement per learner; automatic user deletion and anonymization are configurable at set intervals, and a data processing agreement is offered. For a works agreement under §87(1) no. 6 BetrVG the gaps are decisive: we found no public information on switching off time tracking or scoring, on aggregated or pseudonymised reporting, on a learner data export, or on any works council guide or impact assessment, and the terms keep statistical data for five years after a user's deletion. 8 9 10 15 16
The IT & HR Systems Admin
Interactive role-tailored dashboards, an Analytics Permissions system that pre-filters data by role and organisation for managers and local admins, and configurable automatic user deletion and anonymisation give us controllable, defensible reporting. We found no public information on scheduled report delivery, switching off time or score tracking, a learner data export, or any works-council or codetermination material, which I need for our internal works agreement. 8 9 15 16
The Skeptic
Role-based analytics permissions that pre-filter dashboards to a user's role and organisation, configurable automatic user deletion and data anonymisation, stated retention for system logs and statistical data, and a standard data processing agreement put the basics in writing. We found no public information on scheduled report delivery, aggregated or pseudonymised reporting, switching off time or score tracking, a learner-facing data export, or any works council or codetermination material. 16 15 8 9
Integrations, administration & portability
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the system fits the company and what leaving would cost: single sign-on (SAML, OpenID Connect) and user provisioning (SCIM) from Entra ID, Google or Okta, sync with HR systems (Personio, SAP SuccessFactors, Workday), Microsoft Teams, Slack and video conferencing integrations, a documented REST API and webhooks, CRM and e-commerce connectors for academies, export of users, completions and certificates, export of courses as SCORM, open-source code, and a self-hosted or on-premise edition.
0 — No integrations and no export; users and records exist only inside the product.
3 — CSV import of users and an export of reports; SSO, an API and HR-system sync are basic or not described.
5 — SAML or OpenID Connect single sign-on, a documented REST API, a connector or documented sync for at least one named HR system, Microsoft Teams or video conferencing integration, and export of users, completions and certificates.
8 — SCIM provisioning, prebuilt connectors for several named HR, CRM and identity systems, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, a sandbox or test instance, courses exportable as SCORM, and a self-hosted or private-cloud edition with its own documentation.
10 — The customer can run, extend and leave the platform freely: open-source code under a named licence that runs fully self-hosted with feature parity stated, a complete export of users, history, certificates and content in open formats, and the return and deletion of all data on termination documented.
The Onboarding Lead
SAML2 and OpenID/OAuth2 single sign-on with provisioning from Microsoft and Google, native integrations including Salesforce, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect, an open API reaching HRIS and CRM, and a genuinely documented on-premise edition where our own staff run updates, backup and disaster recovery. What keeps it modest: we found no public information on a published API reference with rate limits, on SCIM or webhooks, on a named HR connector, or on export of users, completions and certificates — the last is exactly what I would ask about when pricing the cost of leaving. 8 2 6 9
The Compliance Officer
Single sign-on via SAML2 and OpenID (OAuth2) with provisioning from Microsoft and Google, an open API connecting HRIS, CRM, CMS, video conferencing and legacy systems, native Salesforce, Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect integrations, and a documented on-premise installation with databases on the customer's own infrastructure are all described. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, or export of courses and learner records in open formats another system could import. 8 6 2 9 11
The Customer Education Lead
SAML2 and OpenID (OAuth2) single sign-on with provisioning from Microsoft, Google, CRM systems and web portals, an open API to HRIS, CRM, CMS and video conferencing, a Salesforce integration, Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect, plus an on-premises edition and an optional preproduction test instance — completions flowing to CRM looks feasible. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, or export of my own courses as SCORM packages, which is what leaving would cost me. 8 2 6 9
The Works Council Member
SAML2 and OpenID (OAuth2) single sign-on with user provisioning, an open API for exchange with HRIS, CRM and CMS, named integrations for Salesforce, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect, an optional preproduction environment for testing, and an on-premises edition the customer runs itself are all documented. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, or exporting courses back out as SCORM packages. 2 6 8 9 11
The IT & HR Systems Admin
SAML2 and OpenID/OAuth2 single sign-on, user provisioning from Microsoft and Google, a Microsoft Teams integration, a Salesforce connector, an open API into HRIS and other systems, an optional preproduction environment and a documented on-premises edition tick my baseline boxes for an Entra ID shop. SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, and export of courses as SCORM are not documented on the captured pages, and no named HR system such as Personio appears, so course and record portability out of the platform stays an open question. 2 6 8 9
The Skeptic
SAML2 and OpenID (OAuth2) single sign-on, user provisioning from Microsoft and Google, named integrations for Salesforce, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Adobe Connect, an open API reaching HRIS, CRM and CMS systems, and an on-premises edition with "the complete implementation of your LMS databases and software on your own infrastructure" are all on the pages. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a public API reference with rate limits, export of users, completions and certificates, or export of courses as SCORM, so what leaving would actually cost is not documented. 8 6 2 9
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where learner data (names, completions, scores, certificates) is stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, video streaming, email, AI features, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; learner records are employee data, 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 hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (video, email, AI features, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated — or a self-hosted edition documented that keeps every learner 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 Onboarding Lead
The entity is Eurekos Systems ApS of Hillerød, Denmark acting as controller, a standard data processing agreement is provided, transfers outside the EU/EEA are covered by the EU Commission Standard Contractual Clauses, ISO 27001 and 27701 certifications are published, and an on-premise option implements the LMS databases on our own infrastructure. However, we found no public information on where the cloud platform is hosted, the AWS CloudFront video chain's region, or a list of the sub-processors with their locations — the pages only say customers are informed when a sub-processor is replaced. 10 9 8 15 2
The Compliance Officer
The privacy policy names Eurekos Systems ApS as controller, a standard data processing agreement exists, ISO/IEC 27001 and 27701 certifications are stated, transfers outside the EEA run on EU Commission Standard Contractual Clauses, and an on-premise configuration puts the complete databases and software on the customer's own infrastructure. We found no public information on where the cloud service is hosted, or on the identities and locations of the subprocessors behind video streaming, support and marketing — for a bank, that chain is the whole question. 10 9 8 2
The Customer Education Lead
The contracting entity is Eurekos Systems ApS acting as data controller with a GDPR policy, a standard data processing agreement, standard contractual clauses for transfers outside the EU/EEA, and ISO 27001 and 27701 certifications — a Danish vendor with real privacy credentials. But hosting location is not stated on the captured pages, sub-processors are used without being listed, and video streaming runs through AWS CloudFront; the documented on-premises edition, which puts the complete databases on my own infrastructure, is the strongest sovereignty lever here. 10 9 8 2
The Works Council Member
The contracting entity is Eurekos Systems ApS in Denmark, a data processing agreement is offered, ISO 27001 and 27701 certifications are stated, and an on-premises edition is documented that puts the complete LMS databases and software on the customer's own infrastructure — the one configuration in which our people's learner records stay on our servers. For the cloud edition we found no public information on where learner data is hosted; the terms acknowledge sub-processors without listing them, AWS CloudFront is named for video streaming with no location, and transfers outside the EU/EEA rest only on a general reference to Standard Contractual Clauses. 2 8 9 10
The IT & HR Systems Admin
The contracting and controller entity is the Danish Eurekos Systems ApS, a data processing agreement exists with customer notification when sub-processors are replaced, transfers outside the EU/EEA rely on the EU Commission Standard Contractual Clauses, and ISO/IEC 27001 and 27701 certifications are stated. Where the cloud service hosts learner data is not stated, the sub-processors are not listed, and video streaming runs through AWS CloudFront without a stated region, though an on-premises edition that puts the complete databases on our own infrastructure is offered. 2 8 9 10
The Skeptic
The privacy policy names Eurekos Systems ApS as the controller, a standard data processing agreement with sub-processor replacement notification exists, ISO/IEC 27001 and 27701 certifications are stated, and transfers outside the EU/EEA are covered by Standard Contractual Clauses. But the captured pages never state where the cloud platform and its learner databases are hosted, the sub-processors are not listed by name or location, and the video chain runs through AWS CloudFront with no region stated; the documented on-premises option is the only evidenced way to keep records on your own servers. 10 9 8 15 2
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per tier by active or registered users, what counts as an active user, what happens above the tier, which features (SSO, API, HR connectors, extra portals, e-commerce, custom domain, content library) cost extra, the free tier or trial and its limits, implementation and support fees, the self-hosted edition and its licence, minimum term and VAT treatment.
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, portals or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per user band and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, API, extra portals, HR connector, implementation) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (active or registered users, portals), the definition of an active user and overage stated, add-ons priced, the self-hosted edition's cost or licence stated, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of learners, portals and features, with every add-on, implementation, support and overage fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Onboarding Lead
The pricing page names the model — you pay for your number of active users per month, described as all-inclusive with unlimited portals at no additional cost, and all prices exclusive of VAT — but the price itself is a contact form: "Please fill out the form and we will get back to you with more information about pricing right away." Beyond support being included in the subscription, we found no public information on tier prices, on what counts as an active user, on a trial, or on implementation fees, so I cannot compute our annual cost from public pages. 7 9 13
The Compliance Officer
There are no public prices — pricing comes after filling out a contact form — although the billing basis of active users per month, the all-inclusive no-hidden-costs claim, VAT-exclusive treatment, the 12-month term with 90 days' notice, and fees such as EUR 150 per hour for customer-caused data restores are published. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost for a given headcount from the public pages alone. 7 9
The Customer Education Lead
The pricing page directs buyers to a contact form and we found no published platform prices, so I cannot compute an annual cost for my 3,000 customers and 120 partners — the published model (you pay for your number of active users per month, all-inclusive, unlimited portals at no additional cost) tells me the shape but not the number. Term facts are public (12 months, 90 days' notice, prices exclusive of VAT, support included, data restore invoiced at EUR 150 per hour beyond 2 hours), which earns some credit without making the price computable. 7 9 13
The Works Council Member
The pricing page publishes no figures — it asks you to fill out a form and promises pricing information in reply — so no annual cost can be computed from public pages. What is public is structure rather than price: you pay for active users per month with a monthly reset, all prices are stated exclusive of taxes and VAT, the term is twelve months with ninety days' notice, support is included, unlimited portals come at no additional cost, and a customer-caused data restore beyond two hours is invoiced at EUR 150 per hour. 7 9 13
The IT & HR Systems Admin
There are no public prices at all — the pricing page asks buyers to fill out a form to receive pricing information — though the model is described as consumption-based on active users per month, all-inclusive, with unlimited portals at no additional cost. The terms add that all prices are exclusive of any taxes, vat, fees, levies, or duties and a data restore beyond 2 hours is invoiced at EUR 150 per hour, but I cannot compute an annual cost for our 600 users from public pages. 7 9 13
The Skeptic
The pricing page asks you to "fill out the form and we will get back to you with more information about pricing right away" — no price per user or tier is public, and no free tier or trial is described; the €28 shown on the homepage is an example course listing, not the platform price. What is public is the billing basis ("your number of active users per month", consumption-based, resetting monthly), the all-inclusive and unlimited-portals-at-no-extra-cost claims, support included in the subscription, a 12-month auto-renewing term with 90 days' notice, and prices "exclusive of any taxes, vat, fees, levies, or duties" — a model without figures. 7 9 13 1
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 | — | 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 Eurekos
Is Eurekos European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Eurekos as EU-Made.
Where does Eurekos store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Eurekos have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Eurekos?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates iSpring LMS (iSpring Learn) (3/5), Zensai Learn365 (formerly LMS365) (3/5) and LearnWorlds (3/5) highest among the other 12 Learning Management (LMS) 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 Zensai Learn365 (formerly LMS365) (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Eurekos 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. 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.
- 2 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
- 2 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
- 1 pricing 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
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (16)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (customer and partner onboarding) eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (certification management) eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Features page (customer education) eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Integrations page eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Pricing page eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Security / trust page eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Terms of service eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Privacy policy eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Courses, learning paths & content standards — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Courses, learning paths & content standards — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Onboarding, extended enterprise & academies — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Onboarding, extended enterprise & academies — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Reporting, learner data & works council — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Reporting, learner data & works council — found from sitemap eurekos.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →