AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers
Grain
Rest of world Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 6 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Grain Intelligence, Inc. · grain.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.
Grain at a glance
- Vendor
- Grain Intelligence, Inc.
- Headquarters
- Incorporated in United States source, captured 5 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Outside the EU by default; pages mention United States source, captured 5 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 5 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Grain 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Grain is an AI meeting assistant that captures calls with a bot on Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex or through botless desktop recording, producing transcripts, summaries, action items and sync to HubSpot and Salesforce. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 5 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 6 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Grain is an AI meeting assistant that captures calls with a bot on Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex or through botless desktop recording, producing transcripts, summaries, action items and sync to HubSpot and Salesforce. Persona-weighted totals ran 6.0 to 6.7. Its strongest scoring is integrations and workflow at 7-8, crediting a versioned REST API with a 300 requests per minute per token limit, webhooks, OAuth2 and an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor; summaries and knowledge followed at 7-8. Sovereignty is the weak point at 3-4: Grain Intelligence, Inc. is a Delaware corporation under California law, data is hosted in data centers located in the United States, and the listed summarisation and speech-to-text processors sit in the United States, with Rev AI also listing the European Union. Consent and codetermination and pricing transparency both landed at 6: no response is treated as consent, and consent requests need Business or Enterprise plans. The judges did not genuinely split — scores sit within a point on every criterion and no notable disagreement was flagged.
Speaks for it
- A bot captures Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex meetings alongside botless desktop capture and API upload of external recordings.
- The versioned REST API offers 300 requests per minute per token, webhooks and OAuth2, with an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor.
- Notes and properties sync to HubSpot and Salesforce contacts and deals.
- Workspace-wide auto-deletion policies, SOC 2 Type II, encryption at rest and in transit, and a stated commitment never to train AI on meeting data on any plan.
- Consent emails go out 24 hours before auto-captured meetings and a single decline turns auto-capture off for the whole meeting.
Held against it
- Data is hosted in data centers located in the United States and the listed summarisation and speech-to-text processors sit in the United States, with Rev AI alone also listing the European Union.
- No response is treated as consent, "Record anyway" records against a stated preference, and consent responses are emailed to the recorder rather than tracked in the product.
- Desktop capture has no in-meeting consent mechanism and consent requests require Business or Enterprise plans.
- The captured pages give different figures for supported languages — 99 and 100+ — and never name German.
- SAML SSO, SCIM and audit event logs sit on Enterprise at contact-sales pricing, and we found no public information on storage limits, transcription minutes or VAT treatment.
Best for
- You run customer calls on Zoom, Teams, Google Meet or Webex and want notes and properties pushed to HubSpot or Salesforce.
- You want to build on the meeting data yourself, through the documented REST API, webhooks and MCP server.
- You want predictable entry pricing: Free forever at $0 with no credit card, Pro at $15 per month billed annually, Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually with a 2 seat minimum, and no required annual contracts.
- US hosting and a Delaware contracting entity pose no obstacle for your procurement.
Avoid if
- You need recordings and transcripts to stay in the EU — data is hosted in the United States and the listed AI and transcription processors are US-based.
- Your works council requires a documented, in-product consent trail — responses land in the recorder's email and no response is treated as consent.
- You need every capture path consented in-meeting — desktop capture has no such mechanism.
- You must budget SSO, SCIM and audit event logs before signing — these sit on Enterprise at contact-sales pricing.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Recording, transcription & languages | 3.5 of 5 |
| Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge | 3.5 of 5 |
| Integrations, API & workflow | 4 of 5 |
| Consent, participant rights & works council | 3 of 5 |
| Retention, AI training & administration | 3.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 3 of 5 |
Recording, transcription & languages
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the conversation gets in and how faithfully it is written down: a bot that joins Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Webex, botless capture from a desktop or mobile app, in-person meetings and phone calls, file upload, live transcription, speaker identification and names, the languages supported with German stated, meetings that switch language, custom vocabulary for names and jargon, timestamps linked to the recording, and editing of the transcript.
0 — Does not record or transcribe meetings; a note template or agenda tool without capture.
3 — A bot that joins one or two conferencing tools and produces a transcript; languages, speaker names, in-person capture and accuracy are basic or not described.
5 — A bot for Zoom, Teams and Google Meet, a desktop or mobile app for in-person meetings, file upload, speaker identification, German among the supported languages, timestamps linked to the recording, and an editable transcript.
8 — Botless capture documented next to the bot, Webex and phone or dialer calls, live transcription, mixed-language meetings handled, custom vocabulary, speaker names learned across meetings, and the transcription engine or its accuracy per language stated.
10 — Capture a regulated team relies on: every channel above with accuracy published per language and method, dialects and specialist vocabulary documented, on-device or customer-hosted transcription as an option, and how errors are corrected and fed back stated.
The Management Consultant
Both capture paths I need are documented: a bot for Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex alongside botless desktop recording of the computer's audio, with live transcripts, speaker identification by voice, custom vocabulary, external-recording upload, and transcripts downloadable in several formats — and the speech-to-text suppliers (AssemblyAI, Rev AI) are even named on the sub-processor page. What I did not find: phone or dialer capture, handling of meetings that switch language, or published accuracy per language; German itself is never named, only counts of 99 and 100-plus languages, which for my German client calls is a number rather than a promise. 1 4 9 11
The Sales Team Lead
The bot records on Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex, botless desktop capture is documented alongside it, and speaker identification, custom vocabulary, live transcripts and upload of external recordings are all stated. The captured pages give different figures for languages — 99 on the pricing page, 100+ on the homepage — and we found no public information naming German specifically, phone or dialer capture, or accuracy per language. For my Teams and Zoom discovery calls, everything my team runs is covered. 1 4 11
The Works Council Chair
A bot for Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex sits next to botless desktop capture of computer audio, with live transcripts, speaker identification by voice, custom vocabulary, and external recordings uploadable through the API for transcription. The captured pages give different figures for supported languages — ninety-nine on the pricing page and over one hundred on the homepage — and neither names German, states accuracy per language, or describes transcript editing; we found no public information on phone or dialer capture. 1 4 9 11
The Data Protection Officer
Capture runs through a bot on Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Webex and, next to it, botless desktop capture of the computer's audio plus upload of external recordings that are then transcribed, with live transcripts, speaker identification by voice, custom vocabulary and downloadable transcripts in 99 languages. The speech-to-text providers appear with their regions on the sub-processor list, though the captured pages give different figures for the language count (99 and 100+). We found no public information on phone or dialer calls, mixed-language meetings, accuracy per language, or German being explicitly named among the supported languages. 1 4 9 11 16
The IT Lead
A bot joins Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Webex, and a desktop app captures the computer's audio without a bot, with live transcripts, speaker identification by voice, custom vocabulary and upload of external recordings through the API. The captured pages give different figures for the number of supported languages (99 and 100+) and name no specific language such as German, and we found no public information on phone or dialer capture, mixed-language meetings, or accuracy per language. Speech-to-text runs through AssemblyAI and Rev AI per the subprocessor list. 1 4 9 11
The Skeptic
Bot capture on Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex sits next to documented botless desktop capture, live transcripts, speaker identification by voice and custom vocabulary, with file upload on the web app and through the API — that reaches well past the mid anchors. But the captured pages give different figures for languages ("99 languages" against "100+"), German is never named, and we found no public information on phone or dialer calls, mixed-language meetings, accuracy per language, or who actually wrote which transcript beyond the speech-to-text names on the sub-processor list. 1 4 11 16
Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the tool makes of the transcript: summaries and minutes by meeting type with editable templates, decisions and action items with owners and due dates, summaries in the meeting's language or a chosen one, follow-up emails, clips and highlights, search across all meetings, questions answered over the archive with citations back to the transcript passage, shared team folders or channels, and the minutes exported to Word, PDF or a wiki.
0 — No summaries of any kind; only the raw transcript or recording.
3 — One generic summary per meeting; templates, action items, search across meetings and citations are basic or not described.
5 — Summaries with templates per meeting type, action items and decisions extracted, the summary language selectable with German available, search across meetings, questions answered over one or several meetings, and sharing or export of the minutes.
8 — Custom templates per team, action items with owners pushed to task tools, answers that cite and link the transcript passage they rest on, topic or keyword tracking across meetings, team libraries with permissions, and the AI models used for summaries named.
10 — Meeting knowledge a company can audit: every generated statement traceable to its source passage, hallucination handling and human review documented, summary quality by language stated, and the archive queryable through an API or MCP server with the same permissions as in the app.
The Management Consultant
Summaries, action items, next steps and automatic recaps are there, and Ask answers questions across the whole meeting library 'with precise citations', with search by company, topic and keyword, team libraries, trackers, clips, playlists and stories embeddable in Notion or Confluence — and the summarising models are identifiable as OpenAI and Anthropic on the sub-processor list. We found no public information on minutes templates by meeting type, on action items with owners and due dates pushed to a task tool, or on choosing the summary language; for workshop minutes with decisions that is the gap that decides my evenings stay long. 1 2 4 9 10
The Sales Team Lead
Every meeting gets summaries, next steps and action items, Ask answers questions across the whole library with precise citations, and trackers, team libraries, clips and stories are documented. Custom AI prompts and custom AI notes exist, and the subprocessor list names OpenAI and Anthropic as the summarization providers. We found no public information on choosing the summary language, on drafting follow-up emails, or on exporting minutes beyond the Markdown transcript download. 1 2 4 9 10
The Works Council Chair
Summaries, recaps, action items and next steps are generated per meeting, questions can be asked across the whole library with precise citations, search runs by company, topic or keyword, and team libraries with sharing rules plus stories embeddable in Notion or Confluence are documented; the summarisation providers are named in the subprocessor list. We found no public information on templates per meeting type, action items with owners pushed to task tools, or a selectable summary language. 1 2 4 9 10 12
The Data Protection Officer
Meeting notes, automatic recaps, action items and custom AI prompts are documented, questions can be asked across the entire meeting library with citations, trackers cover topics and keywords across meetings, team libraries carry sharing rules, and the summarising models (Anthropic and OpenAI) are named on the sub-processor list. Action items come without stated owners or due dates, and we found no public information on choosing the summary language, hallucination handling and human review, or summary quality by language. 1 2 4 9 10 12
The IT Lead
Summaries and action items come standard, custom AI prompts and notes are configurable, Ask answers questions across the whole meeting library with citations, Trackers follow topics across meetings, and clips, stories, playlists and team libraries with sharing rules are documented. Notes and clips reach Slack, Notion, Productboard and Asana, and stories embed into Notion or Confluence, with the AI providers behind summaries (Anthropic, OpenAI) named on the subprocessor list. We found no public information on selectable summary languages, action-item owners and due dates, or hallucination handling and human review. 1 2 4 9 10 12
The Skeptic
Summaries, next steps and action items arrive with custom AI prompts, question-answering over the whole library "with precise citations", trackers for topics, team libraries with sharing rules, clips and stories, and the summarisation providers (OpenAI, Anthropic) are at least identifiable. What I could not trace: summary language selection with German, export to Word or PDF, and any statement of hallucination handling or human review — the citations exist, the error story does not. 1 4 9 10 12
Integrations, API & workflow
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the notes reach the place where work happens: calendar connection with rules for which meetings are recorded, CRM fields filled from the call (HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Microsoft Dynamics), project and task tools, Slack and Microsoft Teams channels, Notion, Confluence and SharePoint, Zapier, Make or n8n, a documented REST API and webhooks, an MCP server for AI assistants, and browser extensions and native apps.
0 — No integrations and no export; the notes stay in the app.
3 — A calendar connection and an email or Slack summary; CRM, API and task tools are basic or not described.
5 — Google and Microsoft calendars, a native CRM integration (HubSpot or Salesforce), Slack or Teams, a task or wiki tool, Zapier or Make, and a documented API or webhooks.
8 — CRM field mapping per meeting type, several CRMs including Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive, a full REST API with webhooks and reference documentation, an MCP server, SharePoint or Confluence export, and recording rules per calendar or meeting type.
10 — An integration layer a company builds on: every object reachable by API with rate limits and versioning stated, granular OAuth scopes, data residency kept across integrations, and the integrations administered centrally with logs.
The Management Consultant
Google and Microsoft calendars, HubSpot and Salesforce, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Productboard, Asana and Zapier are documented, and the v2 REST API is genuinely built-on material: webhooks with named events, OAuth, personal and workspace tokens, 300 requests per minute, version headers with a sunset date, plus an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor with per-tool toggles and permissions that mirror in-app access. The CRM list stops at HubSpot and Salesforce — we found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive — and field mapping is stated generally as notes and properties syncing to contacts and deals rather than per meeting type. 1 2 4 11 12
The Sales Team Lead
Notes and properties sync to HubSpot and Salesforce contacts and deals — the exact data entry I want gone — with Slack, Zapier, Notion, Productboard, Asana and Confluence embedding around it. The REST API is documented with versioning, rate limits, OAuth2 and webhooks, and an MCP server connects Claude and ChatGPT. We found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive support, or on CRM field mapping per meeting type. 1 2 4 11 12
The Works Council Chair
Microsoft and Google calendars with recording rules, notes and properties synced to HubSpot and Salesforce, Slack, Zapier, Notion, Productboard, Asana and Confluence embeds, plus a documented REST API with versioning, a three-hundred-requests-per-minute limit, webhooks, OAuth2 and personal and workspace tokens, and an MCP server for Claude and ChatGPT. We found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive. 1 2 4 11 12
The Data Protection Officer
Google and Microsoft calendars drive recording rules, HubSpot and Salesforce receive notes and properties on contacts and deals, Slack, Notion, Productboard, Asana, Zapier and Confluence embeds are documented, and a REST API with rate limits, versioning, webhooks and OAuth2 sits beside an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor. We found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics, Pipedrive or CRM field mapping per meeting type, and no sandbox is offered — testing runs against the live workspace. This is a layer a company can build on, with API and MCP access stated per plan. 1 2 4 11 12
The IT Lead
Microsoft and Google calendars, bot capture on Zoom, Meet, Teams and Webex, HubSpot and Salesforce sync, Slack, Notion, Productboard, Asana, Zapier and Confluence embedding cover most of a Microsoft 365 shop. The REST API is versioned with a published rate limit of 300 requests per minute per token, OAuth2 plus personal and workspace tokens, webhooks, and reference documentation; an MCP server connects Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor with per-tool toggles, and rules decide which meetings get recorded. We found no public information on SharePoint, Pipedrive or Microsoft Dynamics integrations, on granular OAuth scopes, or on centrally administered integration logs. 1 2 4 11 12
The Skeptic
A versioned REST API with published rate limit (300 requests per minute per token), webhooks, OAuth2 and reference docs, plus an MCP server for Claude and ChatGPT with per-tool toggles, recording rules, Slack, Zapier, Confluence embed and HubSpot/Salesforce sync — this is an integration layer a buyer can build on. The gaps are the CRMs (no Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive documented) and no statement that data residency survives the integration chain. 2 4 11 12
Consent, participant rights & works council
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether every person in the meeting knows and can decide, and whether the tool can be introduced under German co-determination: a recording notice to all participants including external guests, consent or opt-out before the recording starts, a visible bot or a stated notice for botless capture, rules for when the assistant joins automatically, stopping and deleting a recording on request, per-person analytics (talk time, sentiment, engagement scores) off by default or switchable per organisation, material or a template for a works agreement (Betriebsvereinbarung, § 87 (1) no. 6 BetrVG), and support for a data protection impact assessment.
0 — Built to record people without their knowledge, or sells covert recording or individual performance scoring as a feature.
3 — A general privacy statement and a bot that appears in the participant list; notices to guests, opt-out, per-person analytics and works councils are basic or not described.
5 — A recording notice to participants by chat message, email or the bot's name, a way for a participant to stop the recording or opt out, admin rules for when the assistant joins, recordings deletable on request, and per-person analytics described with how to switch them off.
8 — Consent collected before recording starts for external participants, per-person analytics off by default or switchable per organisation, botless capture with its notice method documented, a works-council information pack or works-agreement template published, DPIA support, and the EU AI Act classification stated.
10 — Co-determination built into the product: every analytic and its granularity documented for the works council, consent and opt-out logged per participant, configuration changes logged, minimum group sizes for any team statistics, and references of works-council-approved rollouts published.
The Management Consultant
For bot meetings this is better than most: an email 24 hours before auto-captured meetings asking attendees to consent or decline, one decline turns auto-capture off for the whole meeting, participants see a consent-or-leave disclaimer modal, and a bot joining someone else's meeting needs the host's permission before recording. But the consent record lives in the recorder's email inbox rather than in the product, no response is treated as consent, a 'Record anyway' override records against a stated preference, and the help pages themselves state desktop capture has no in-meeting consent mechanism and the user is responsible for informing participants. We found no public information on works-council material or a works-agreement template, DPIA support, EU AI Act classification, or how to switch off the per-person coaching scorecards and conversation intelligence a works council would ask about first. 4 12 13 14 15 16
The Sales Team Lead
Consent requests email attendees 24 hours before auto-captured meetings, a single decline turns auto-capture off for the whole meeting, non-hosts must get host permission, and a personalized disclaimer plus Zoom's native consent reporting handle the in-call notice — on Business and Enterprise plans, off by default. The consent page itself states that no response counts as consent, that responses are recorded by email rather than in the app, and that desktop capture meetings send no consent emails. We found no public information on a works-agreement template, DPIA support, EU AI Act classification, or how per-person analytics like the coaching scorecards are switched off. 12 13 14 15 16
The Works Council Chair
The mechanics exist: consent emails go out twenty-four hours before a meeting, one decline switches auto-capture off for the whole meeting, the bot needs the host's permission, and participants see a disclaimer modal they can consent to or leave — but silence is treated as consent, internal meetings are not asked by default, a record-anyway button records against a stated preference, desktop capture has no notice mechanism, and consent records are emailed to the recorder rather than tracked in the product. For our co-determination file we found no public information on a works-agreement template, DPIA support or the AI Act classification, and while sales coaching scorecards and team performance reports exist, we found no public information on switching per-person analytics off for the organisation. 13 16 14 12
The Data Protection Officer
Consent emails go out 24 hours ahead, any decline disables auto-capture for the meeting, responses are documented to the recorder, bot-recorded calls carry a personalised disclaimer, and Zoom's native consent reporting can be leveraged. Against that, Desktop Capture has no in-meeting consent mechanism and the burden stays verbal, silence is treated as consent, a "record anyway" override records against a stated preference, and consent requests are gated to Business and Enterprise plans and tracked by email rather than in the app. We found no public information on works-council material, a works-agreement template, DPIA support or an EU AI Act classification. 4 6 13 14 16
The IT Lead
The consent machinery is real: on Business and Enterprise, attendees are emailed 24 hours before auto-captured meetings, one decline turns auto-capture off for the whole meeting, bot-joined calls show a disclaimer modal where participants consent or leave, and the bot needs host permission when the recorder is not the host. For a works-council rollout the gaps are concrete: desktop capture has no in-meeting consent mechanism, no response is treated as consent, consent responses sit in the recorder's email rather than a log, and sales coaching scorecards and team performance reports appear with no documented default-off setting. We found no public information on a works-agreement template, DPIA support, or an EU AI Act classification. 12 13 14 15 16
The Skeptic
The pre-meeting consent flow is real: attendees emailed 24 hours ahead, a decline turning off auto-capture for the whole meeting, a disclaimer modal for the bot, and Zoom's native consent reporting can be leveraged. But silence is treated as consent, the recorder can click "Record anyway" against a stated preference, the whole flow is gated to Business and Enterprise and works only for bot meetings — desktop capture explicitly has no consent mechanism — with responses kept in the recorder's email inbox rather than a log; we found no public information on works-council material, a works-agreement template, DPIA support or an EU AI Act classification, and no statement that per-person analytics such as sales coaching scorecards default to off. 13 14 15 16
Retention, AI training & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the employer can govern: retention periods and automatic deletion of recordings, transcripts and summaries, whether audio and video can be discarded after transcription, sharing defaults and link permissions, customer content excluded from model training by contract, the AI and transcription providers named with their region and their own retention, encryption, single sign-on (SAML), SCIM, roles and workspaces, admin policies on auto-recording and sharing, audit logs, export of the whole archive, and security certifications such as ISO 27001 and SOC 2.
0 — No administration and no deletion; every user decides alone and recordings are kept indefinitely.
3 — Users can delete their own recordings and a security page exists; retention policies, model training, SSO and audit logs are basic or not described.
5 — Retention settings per workspace, customer content excluded from model training, team workspaces with roles, single sign-on, admin control over sharing and auto-recording, encryption at rest and in transit, and ISO 27001 or SOC 2 stated.
8 — Automatic deletion by policy with audio discardable after transcription, the AI and transcription subprocessors named with region and zero retention, SAML with SCIM, granular roles, audit logs, legal hold or export of the full archive, and certifications with their scope published.
10 — Governance an auditor accepts: every retention, sharing and recording policy enforceable centrally and logged, models run on the vendor's own or the customer's infrastructure as an option, audit logs exportable to a SIEM, and the deletion of every copy, including at subprocessors, documented.
The Management Consultant
'Grain never trains AI with your meeting data on any plan' is the sentence in writing I ask every vendor for, and it sits alongside a stated no-retention arrangement with the LLM providers, workspace-wide auto-deletion, per-recording deletion, link and team sharing rules, encryption at rest and in transit, SOC 2 Type II, and Enterprise SAML with SCIM, audit event logs and bring-your-own-LLM on Azure, Bedrock or Vertex. Against that, we found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, or the scope of the SOC 2 audit, and audit logs plus SCIM sit behind the Enterprise plan; sub-processors are named with locations but their own retention terms are only referenced as addendum links. 4 5 9 15 16
The Sales Team Lead
Workspace-wide auto-deletion policies, individual recording deletion, a no-AI-training commitment on every plan, SAML SSO with SCIM and audit event logs on Enterprise, SOC 2 Type II, encryption at rest and in transit, and API export of video and transcripts give me real governance to show our side. We found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, exporting audit logs to a SIEM, or ISO 27001. 4 5 11 15 16
The Works Council Chair
Workspace-wide auto-deletion policies, link permissions, team sharing rules, deletion of individual recordings and a stated policy of never training AI on meeting data give a works council something concrete to negotiate over, with SAML SSO and SCIM, audit event logs and bring-your-own-LLM on Enterprise and SOC 2 Type II stated. The base retention is only as long as needed to provide the Services, and we found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, or exporting audit logs to a SIEM. 4 15 16 5 9 8 11
The Data Protection Officer
Workspace-wide auto-deletion policies, deletion of individual recordings, link access and team sharing rules, SAML SSO with SCIM and audit event logs on Enterprise, SOC 2 Type II, encryption at rest and in transit, exclusion of meeting data from AI training on every plan, and a named sub-processor list including the LLM and speech-to-text providers give an administrator a great deal to govern. For my impact assessment the gaps remain: retention is stated as "as long as needed to provide the Services", audio disposal after transcription is undocumented, the voice profiles behind speaker identification are unexplained, and certification scope and SIEM export of audit logs are not published. 4 5 8 9 15 16
The IT Lead
What I need to govern exists but mostly at the top tier: workspace-wide auto-deletion policies, no AI training on customer meeting data on any plan, encryption at rest and in transit, SOC 2 Type II, and SAML SSO with SCIM and audit event logs on Enterprise, plus full-archive export through the API. Subprocessors including Anthropic, OpenAI, AssemblyAI and Recall.ai are listed with locations, and zero retention is stated for the LLM providers. We found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, or the published scope of the certifications. 4 5 9 11 15 16
The Skeptic
Workspace-wide auto-deletion, link and team sharing rules, role-based access, SAML SSO with SCIM and audit event logs on Enterprise, SOC 2 Type II, encryption at rest and in transit, API export of recordings and transcripts, and sub-processors named with their regions — a genuine administration story, and "never trains AI with your meeting data on any plan" is at least stated publicly. I still want the auditor's pieces: audio discardable after transcription, ISO 27001, the certification's scope, deletion documented down to the sub-processors, and bring-your-own-LLM exists only as an Enterprise line item with no detail on where those models run. 4 9 11 15 16
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where recordings, transcripts, summaries, voice profiles and account data are stored and processed, which language model and transcription providers read them and where, and who the other subprocessors are (hosting, email, support, analytics and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline. A conferencing platform outside Europe that the customer already uses is part of the meeting, not counted against the notetaker; where the notetaker stores and processes the conversation is.
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 (language models, transcription, email, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors including the AI providers listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, with transcription and language models run in Europe by European operators, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Management Consultant
The contracting entity is a Delaware corporation in San Francisco with California governing law, every data centre is in the United States on AWS, and the sub-processor list — a genuine plus for transparency — names OpenAI, Anthropic and AssemblyAI, all located in the United States, for summarisation and speech-to-text. We found no public information on a European hosting option, an EU entity or representative, or a data processing agreement confirmed on the vendor's own pages; for client conversations in Munich this is where my evaluation ends, whatever the transcript quality. 4 5 7 9
The Sales Team Lead
The contracting entity is a Delaware corporation in San Francisco, recordings are stored on AWS in the United States, and the listed subprocessors — OpenAI, Anthropic and AssemblyAI for summaries and transcription among them — sit almost entirely in the US, with Rev AI showing a European Union location alongside the United States. A DPA is referenced and SOC 2 stated, but we found no public information on a European hosting option, a European entity, or transfer safeguards. Every call my team records would cross the Atlantic; that is the first question my Mittelstand prospects will ask. 4 5 7 9
The Works Council Chair
Grain Intelligence, Inc. is a Delaware corporation in San Francisco, the terms state customer data sits in United States data centres on AWS, and every provider that touches the conversation — Anthropic, OpenAI, AssemblyAI, Recall.ai — is US-based, with only Rev AI listing a European Union location alongside the United States. The subprocessor list is published with locations, which is more candour than many show, but we found no public information on a European hosting option, an EU contracting entity, or a data processing agreement with the customer on the vendor's own pages; Enterprise offers bring-your-own-LLM through Azure, Bedrock or Vertex, though the pages do not state where those models then run. 7 5 9 4
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is a Delaware corporation under California law and all customer data is hosted in United States data centres, and the sub-processor list is candid — Anthropic and OpenAI (United States) for summarisation, AssemblyAI (United States) and Rev AI (United States and European Union) for speech-to-text, AWS (United States) for recording storage — but we found no public information on EU hosting, an EU contracting entity or representative, or transfer safeguards such as standard contractual clauses. A "mutually signed DPA" appears on the pricing page and DPA links for AssemblyAI and Amplitude on the sub-processor page, yet no data processing agreement is confirmed on the vendor's own captured legal pages. 4 7 9
The IT Lead
Grain Intelligence, Inc. is a Delaware corporation under California law, the terms state that data is hosted in data centers in the United States with 30 days' notice before any offshore move, and the entire AI chain (Anthropic, OpenAI, AssemblyAI, Recall.ai) sits in the United States, with Rev AI the only speech-to-text provider showing a European Union location alongside the US. The subprocessor list with locations and a data processing addendum reference are transparent, which is more than a bare privacy policy. We found no public information on European hosting options or an EU contracting entity, so for our German entity this is not a sovereign deployment. 4 5 7 9
The Skeptic
Grain Intelligence, Inc. is a Delaware corporation under California law with mandatory arbitration, "Your Data is currently hosted… in data centers located in the United States" on AWS, and every AI and transcription processor — Anthropic, OpenAI, AssemblyAI, Recall.ai — sits in the United States (Rev AI is listed for both the US and the EU). The sub-processor list is commendably transparent, which is why this is not the bottom anchor, but we found no EU hosting option, no EU entity or representative, and no published customer data processing agreement; the chain is American end to end. 5 7 9
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per seat and tier, what counts as a seat (every invited user, only recording users), transcription minutes or credits included, storage limits, which features (CRM integrations, API access, SSO, custom retention, EU hosting, AI credits) cost extra, the free tier and its limits, monthly versus annual billing, minimum seats and VAT.
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 seats, minutes or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their seat price and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, CRM integration, API, custom retention, EU hosting, minute or credit limits) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (seats, minutes, credits, storage), add-ons priced, what counts as a seat stated, overage handling stated, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given team size and meeting volume, with every add-on, overage and support fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Management Consultant
Free forever without a credit card, Pro at $15 per month billed annually and $19 billed monthly, Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually and $39 billed monthly with a two-seat minimum, and the per-tier meeting-length limits (45 minutes to unlimited), upload limits and feature gates — consent requests, trackers, workspace API tokens, MCP scope — are published, so I can price most of a rollout from the page alone. Enterprise is 'Contact sales for demo & pricing', which puts SSO, SCIM and audit logs effectively on request, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, storage limits or overage handling. 4 10 11 13
The Sales Team Lead
Free at $0 with no credit card, Pro at $15 per month billed annually or $19 billed monthly, Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually or $39 billed monthly with a 2 seat minimum, no required annual contracts, and per-plan meeting-length and upload limits are all public. Enterprise is 'Let's talk' pricing, and we found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment or storage limits. 4 10 13 16
The Works Council Chair
The plan matrix is unusually detailed: Free forever with no credit card but a forty-five-minute bot limit and five manual uploads, Pro at $15 per month billed annually or $19 billed monthly, Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually or $39 billed monthly with a two-seat minimum, Enterprise on request, with meeting lengths, upload limits and MCP access per tier stated. What we could not compute from public pages: VAT treatment, storage limits, transcription minutes or credits, and precisely what counts as a seat beyond the mention of free viewer seats; consent requests, trackers and SSO sit in the upper tiers, with SSO effectively priced on request. 4 1 13
The Data Protection Officer
Free, Pro and Business are priced publicly with monthly and annual figures — Free forever at $0 with no credit card, Pro at $15 per month billed annually and $19 billed monthly, Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually and $39 billed monthly with a 2-seat minimum and free viewer seats — and the plan matrices disclose meeting-length and upload limits and which features need Business or Enterprise. Enterprise is contact-sales only, and we found no public information on storage limits, transcription minute or credit allowances, VAT treatment, overage handling, or what precisely counts as a seat. 4 10 13
The IT Lead
Free ($0 forever, no credit card), Pro at $15 per month billed annually ($19 billed monthly) and Business at $29 per seat/month billed annually ($39 billed monthly, 2 seat minimum) are public, with per-tier meeting-length limits, upload limits and MCP scope shown and no required annual contracts. The real cost for four hundred seats is not computable: SAML SSO, SCIM and audit event logs sit on Enterprise at "Contact sales for demo & pricing", consent requests need Business or above, and workspace API tokens need Business or Enterprise. We found no public information on VAT treatment, storage limits, or exactly what counts as a paid seat beyond free viewer seats on Business. 4 11 13 16
The Skeptic
Free forever at $0 with no credit card, "$15 per month billed annually $19 billed monthly", "$29 per seat/month billed annually $39 billed monthly 2 seat minimum", and a plan matrix that states meeting-length caps, upload limits and which plans get Zapier, MCP and consent features — monthly versus annual is stated, as are the two-seat minimum and no required annual contracts. What a buyer cannot compute: Enterprise is "Contact sales", storage limits and any minute or credit meter are unpriced, overage handling and VAT treatment are unstated, and the seat definition is only half-answered by "free viewer seats" on Business. 4 13
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 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 | Incorporated in US | 0/2 pts | 7 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Outside the EU ⚠ unverified | 0/4 pts | 5 Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Grain
Is Grain European?
No. whats-best.ai classifies Grain as Rest of world. Its vendor, Grain Intelligence, Inc., is incorporated in United States, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
Where does Grain store data?
Grain stores customer data outside the EU by default, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026. The vendor’s pages mention United States as hosting location, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
Does Grain have a free plan?
Yes. Grain has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Grain?
As of 6 Nov 2026, the panel rates MeetGeek (3.5/5), Noota (3.5/5) and Jamie (3.5/5) highest among the other 14 AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers 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 MeetGeek (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Grain alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 5 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 — Data processing agreement. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- Weak sourcing — Hosting location. The page speaks of hosting Grain's software rather than customer data explicitly, but this is corroborated by the sub-processor list showing video call recording storage with AWS in the United States.
- 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.
- 4 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 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 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 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 grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (product and UX teams) grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Integrations page grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Pricing page grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Security / trust page grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Privacy page (recording and sharing) grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Terms of service grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Subprocessor list grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Integrations, API & workflow — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Integrations, API & workflow — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Consent, participant rights & works council — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Consent, participant rights & works council — found from sitemap grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Retention, AI training & administration — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Retention, AI training & administration — found from sitemap support.grain.com Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →