AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers
Krisp AI Meeting Assistant
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 Krisp Technologies, Inc. · krisp.ai
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.
Krisp AI Meeting Assistant at a glance
- Vendor
- Krisp Technologies, 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
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 5 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Krisp AI Meeting Assistant 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Krisp's AI Meeting Assistant is strongest on capture and transcription: bot and bot-free modes, in-person capture on desktop and mobile, file upload, speaker labels, a 750-term workspace vocabulary and a stated 96% accuracy in 17 languages — though the captured pages give different figures for the language count, and German is not named among the languages on any of them. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 5 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 6 Nov 2026. all sources
Krisp AI Meeting Assistant alternatives, European ones first →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Krisp's AI Meeting Assistant is strongest on capture and transcription: bot and bot-free modes, in-person capture on desktop and mobile, file upload, speaker labels, a 750-term workspace vocabulary and a stated 96% accuracy in 17 languages — though the captured pages give different figures for the language count, and German is not named among the languages on any of them. Integrations and workflow follow at 6-7, on 47 integrations with native Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Affinity and Slack connectors, Zapier carrying the rest, an MCP integration and team-level webhooks. Summaries and knowledge, data control and administration, and pricing transparency land at 5-6. The weakest band is consent and codetermination at 3-4: we found no public information on participant notice or opt-out before recording, works-council material or DPIA support, while the pages advertise Zoom transcription with "No host permissions required." Sovereignty scores sit at 4 with no spread — a Delaware corporation stores transcripts, recordings and summaries on AWS in Northern Virginia, USA, and we found no public information on an EU hosting option. Scores differ by at most one point per criterion: the judges differ in weight, not direction.
Speaks for it
- Capture and transcription scored 7-8, covering bot and bot-free modes, in-person capture, file upload, speaker labels and a 750-term workspace vocabulary.
- Forty-seven integrations include native Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Affinity and Slack, plus Zapier, an MCP integration, team-level webhooks and an API option.
- Audio is deleted from the servers once the transcript is generated.
- SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS 4.0, HIPAA and GDPR are listed, with a published CAIQ v4.1.0 self-assessment, a public subprocessor list and BAA signing for teams with 100+ seats.
- Core at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user are published with unlimited transcription, per-tier storage of 10 GB and 60 GB, and an advertised free tier.
Held against it
- Consent and codetermination scored 3-4, with no public information on participant notice, opt-out before recording, works-council material or DPIA support, while the pages advertise "No host permissions required."
- Recordings and meeting notes are stored until the customer instructs deletion, and we found no public information on configurable retention periods, audit logs or admin auto-recording policies.
- Transcripts, recordings and summaries are stored on AWS in Northern Virginia, USA, by a Delaware corporation, and we found no public information on an EU hosting option.
- Summaries share transcripts with an unnamed third-party service provider, and the captured pages give different positions on AI training.
- Enterprise — where SSO/SCIM and on-device transcription sit — is "Custom Pricing" via "Talk to Sales", with no public information on what counts as a seat or on VAT treatment.
Best for
- You run a revenue team on Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive or Affinity and want notes, action items and meeting insights pushed into the CRM automatically.
- You need flexible capture across settings — bot-free or bot mode, in-person meetings from desktop or mobile, and uploaded recordings.
- You are a buyer for whom US processing is acceptable and SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS 4.0 and a BAA at 100+ seats matter more than EU residency of meeting content.
- You want a published per-seat price for smaller teams, starting at $8/mo/user with unlimited transcription.
Avoid if
- Your meetings must stay in the EU/EEA — transcripts, recordings and summaries are stored on AWS in Northern Virginia, USA, and we found no public information on an EU hosting option.
- You need a consent-first workflow — the terms put compliance with recording laws on the user, and we found no public information on participant notice or opt-out before capture.
- Your company requires fixed retention periods and audit logs — the stated default keeps recordings and meeting notes until you instruct deletion.
- Your rollout depends on a works agreement or DPIA — the pages market recording that "silently handles transcripts and recordings", and we found no works-agreement template, works-council pack or DPIA support on them.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Recording, transcription & languages | 3.5 of 5 |
| Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge | 3 of 5 |
| Integrations, API & workflow | 3.5 of 5 |
| Consent, participant rights & works council | 1.5 of 5 |
| Retention, AI training & administration | 3 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
Bot-free capture is documented alongside an optional bot, in-person workshops work from mobile or desktop without a laptop open, and file upload, real-time transcription, speaker labels, choice of transcript-only, audio or video modes and a 750-term custom vocabulary for names and jargon are all on the public pages, with on-device transcription on the Enterprise tier. The captured pages give different figures for language count (16, 17+ and 17 with 96% accuracy) and none of them lists German by name, which matters for half of my calls. We found no public information on accuracy per language, Webex or phone-call capture, or editing of the transcript. 1 3 4 6 11
The Sales Team Lead
Both a bot-free mode and an on-demand meeting bot are documented, alongside in-person capture from mobile and desktop, audio and video upload, real-time transcription, speaker labels, a 750-term workspace vocabulary and a stated 96% accuracy across 17 languages; the Enterprise tier adds private on-device transcription and recordings. We found no public information on Webex or dialer capture, per-language accuracy, or editable, timestamped transcripts, and German is not named among the languages on the captured pages — a real gap for me when every deal call runs in German. 1 3 4 6 11
The Works Council Chair
Botless capture on any conferencing app sits next to an optional meeting bot, in-person recording runs on desktop and mobile, recordings can be uploaded, speaker labels and real-time transcription are documented, and 96 percent accuracy with 750 workspace-level custom terms is stated — the captured pages give different figures for language count, 16 versus 17+, and an on-device transcription option exists on the Enterprise plan. I found no public information on timestamps linked to the recording, an editable transcript, or accuracy stated per language, so I stay one step below the top. 1 3 4 6 8 11
The Data Protection Officer
Bot and bot-free modes are both documented alongside in-person capture on desktop and mobile, file upload, real-time transcription, speaker labels, recording presets from transcript-only to video, a 750-term workspace vocabulary with industry starter kits, and on-device transcription on the enterprise plan. Transcription is stated at 96% accuracy across 17 languages, but no per-language figure is given, German is not named among the languages, and we found no public information on Webex or phone capture or on transcript editing. 1 3 4 6 11
The IT Lead
Bot and bot-free modes are both documented, alongside real-time transcription, speaker labels, a 750-term workspace vocabulary, in-person capture on desktop and mobile, file upload, and a stated 96% accuracy across 17 languages. We found no public information on Webex or dialer phone capture, accuracy per language, German named among the languages, transcript editing, or timestamps linked to the recording. 1 3 4 6 8 11
The Skeptic
Bot-free capture is documented next to a bot mode, with real-time transcription, in-person and upload capture, speaker labels, a 750-term custom vocabulary and on-device transcription on the top plan — that is most of the way to the top tier. What holds it back: Webex and phone or dialer calls are not named on the captured pages, accuracy is one blanket 96% figure rather than per language, and the pages give different figures for supported languages (16, 17 and 17+). 1 3 4 6 11
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 that highlight key decisions and tasks, automatic action items identified and assigned to the right people, short or long formats, recap emails to participants and a chat that answers questions over the transcripts are documented, with notes pushed to CRM and tasks to project tools. For minutes I can actually file, we found no public information on templates per meeting type, on the summary language being selectable, or on search across all meetings, and nothing shows answers citing the transcript passage they rest on. 1 3 5 9 11
The Sales Team Lead
Summaries come in short and long formats and highlight key decisions and tasks, action items are identified and assigned to the right people, and an in-product chat answers questions from the transcripts in multiple languages. Notes, action items and meeting insights are pushed automatically to HubSpot, Salesforce and project tools, which is exactly the write-back my reps need; we found no public information on drafted follow-up emails — only recap emails to participants that can be disabled — or on search across all meetings, citations back to transcript passages, and export to Word, PDF or a wiki. 1 3 5 9 11
The Works Council Chair
Short and long meeting summaries with action items assigned to the right people, an in-product chat answering questions over transcripts in multiple languages, and automatic pushes of notes and tasks to Slack, HubSpot and Salesforce are documented. I found no public information on templates per meeting type, search across all past meetings, export to Word or PDF, or answers that cite the transcript passage they rest on — and the terms name only proprietary AI models or third-party models without identifying them. 1 3 5 9 11
The Data Protection Officer
Short or long summaries highlight key decisions and tasks, action items are assigned to the right people and pushed to Salesforce, HubSpot and Slack, and an in-product chat answers questions over transcripts in multiple languages. We found no public information on answers that cite and link the transcript passage they rest on, on search across the whole archive, on summary quality by language, or on the models behind summaries beyond generic references to proprietary and third-party models. 1 3 5 11
The IT Lead
Summaries come in short or long formats with decisions and tasks highlighted, action items are assigned to named people and pushed to Salesforce, HubSpot and Slack, AI chat answers questions over transcripts in multiple languages, and participants get recap emails they can switch off. We found no public information on templates per meeting type, search across all meetings, answers citing the transcript passage they rest on, or export to Word, PDF or a wiki. 1 3 5 9 11
The Skeptic
Summaries come in short and long formats with decisions, tasks and owners assigned, an in-product chat answers questions over the transcripts, and notes share to Slack and push to the CRM. But we found no public information on templates per meeting type, search across meetings, German named as a summary language, or answers that cite the transcript passage they rest on — and the terms say only "proprietary artificial intelligence models or Third-Party Models", so which model writes the summary stays unnamed. 1 3 9 11
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
Forty-seven integrations with a clear split between the native ones (Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Affinity, Slack, Notion, Teams, ConnectWise) and the rest through Zapier, plus an API, webhooks, an MCP server, a Chrome extension and desktop and mobile apps — my notes would reach Teams and Slack without trouble. We found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics, Confluence or SharePoint export, or recording rules per calendar or meeting type. 1 5 6 8
The Sales Team Lead
HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive and Affinity are native integrations within 47 in total, joined by Slack, Notion, Teams, Zapier, an API integration, team-level webhooks and an MCP integration, plus a Chrome extension, desktop apps and a Google Calendar connection. We found no public information on CRM field mapping per meeting type, Microsoft Dynamics, calendar-level recording rules or API reference documentation, and the captured pages give different plan names for which plans include the native integrations. 1 5 6
The Works Council Chair
Google Calendar, native CRM connectors for HubSpot, Salesforce and Pipedrive, Slack, Teams and Notion, Zapier carrying the rest of the stated 47 integrations, team-level webhooks, an MCP integration, an API option and a Chrome extension are all public. For a rollout at 2,300 employees I found no public information on recording rules per calendar or meeting type, or reference documentation and per-field CRM mapping for the API, which keeps this below the top band. 1 5 6 10
The Data Protection Officer
Forty-seven integrations are listed, with native connections to Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Affinity and Slack, Notion and Teams in the catalogue, the rest via Zapier, plus team-level webhooks, an API integration, an MCP integration on the Core plan, Google Calendar and Zoom, and a Chrome extension. We found no public information on API reference documentation, per-calendar or per-meeting-type recording rules, or field-level CRM mapping. 1 5 6
The IT Lead
Forty-seven integrations are listed, with native Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Affinity and Slack, Teams and Notion among them, the rest running through Zapier, plus an MCP integration, team-level webhooks, an API integration, a Chrome extension and desktop and mobile apps. For a Microsoft 365 shop like mine, we found no public information on SharePoint or Confluence export, a documented REST API reference, recording rules per calendar or meeting type, or CRM field mapping per meeting type. 1 4 5 6 10
The Skeptic
Google Calendar, Slack and Teams, native CRM integrations across Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive and Affinity, Zapier for the remaining integrations, team webhooks, an MCP integration and a Chrome extension are all documented. The API appears only as an "API Integration" line item — we found no public information on reference documentation, rate limits, CRM field mapping or recording rules per calendar. 1 5 6 10
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
This is where it fails my client work: the pages advertise recording with no host permissions required and an assistant that "silently handles transcripts and recordings", so a non-host participant can capture the meeting, and we found no public information on a notice to external guests, consent before the recording starts, or a participant opt-out — recordings are deleted on instruction and recap emails can be switched off, but only after the fact. We found no public information on admin rules for when the assistant joins, on per-person analytics and how to switch them off, or on works-council material, a works-agreement template, DPIA support and the EU AI Act classification. 1 6 9 10 11
The Sales Team Lead
Capture is bot-free by default, works without host permissions, and the homepage says transcripts and recordings are handled 'silently' — the exact wording a works council will circle in red; the terms of use reference recording laws as the customer's responsibility. Recordings and notes are deleted on the customer's instruction and GDPR compliance is claimed, but we found no public information on a recording notice to external guests, a participant opt-out before recording starts, per-person analytics switches, a works-agreement template, DPIA support or an EU AI Act classification. 1 9 10 11
The Works Council Chair
For an introduction under § 87 BetrVG this is the weak spot: the vendor markets that the assistant "silently handles transcripts and recordings" and records Zoom meetings "with no host permissions required", and I found no public information on a recording notice to participants, consent or opt-out before recording starts, a stated notice method for botless capture, or any per-person talk-time, sentiment or engagement analytics and how to switch them off for good. Deletion on customer instruction is documented and the terms point users to recording laws, but no works-agreement template, works-council information pack or DPIA support appears on any page I read. 1 9 10 11
The Data Protection Officer
Recordings and meeting notes are stored only until the customer instructs deletion, recap emails to participants can be disabled in account settings, and the terms place compliance with recording laws on the customer. We found no public information on notice to external guests before recording, a participant opt-out, the notice method for botless capture, per-person analytics and their defaults, works-agreement material or data protection impact assessment support — and a capture page markets Zoom transcription with no host permissions required, which any assessment here would have to address head-on. 6 9 10 11
The IT Lead
Recordings and meeting notes are stored until the customer instructs deletion, a bot visibly joins meetings when enabled, participants receive recap emails they can disable, and the terms put compliance with recording laws on the user. We found no public information on participant consent or opt-out before recording, the notice method for bot-free capture, admin rules for when the assistant joins, works-council or Betriebsvereinbarung material, or per-person analytics controls for the meeting assistant. 1 9 10 11
The Skeptic
A privacy policy exists, a bot can join meetings, recap emails to participants can be switched off, and the terms defer to recording laws. We found no public information on a notice to external guests before capture starts, a participant opt-out, per-person analytics, works-council material or DPIA support — while the marketing leads with "No host permissions required" and an FAQ on transcribing a meeting as a non-host. 1 9 10 11
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
The trust centre states personal data is not used to train Krisp's AI models — close to the written promise I need — while the privacy policy lists improving its proprietary models on the legal basis of consent and sends summaries through an unnamed third-party provider, so the captured pages give different pictures on training. Recordings sit on the servers "until you instruct us to delete" with audio deleted once the transcript is generated; SSO with SCIM, manager and super-admin roles, per-tier storage limits and SOC 2 Type II with a CAIQ are documented. We found no public information on centrally set retention periods, audit logs, sharing defaults or export of the whole archive. 6 8 10
The Sales Team Lead
SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS 4.0, HIPAA and GDPR are listed with a CAIQ self-assessment, encryption at rest and in transit, SSO with SCIM, workspace roles such as manager view and super admin, and per-plan storage from 10 GB to unlimited; personal data is stated not to be used to train the AI models and the subprocessor list is public. Retention runs the wrong way for an employer — recordings and meeting notes are stored until the customer instructs deletion — and we found no public information on centrally enforceable retention periods, admin policies for auto-recording and sharing, or exportable audit logs. 6 7 8 10
The Works Council Chair
Recordings and meeting notes are stored "until you instruct us to delete" — no configurable retention period is documented anywhere I read, which for meeting recordings at our company I cannot accept, though audio is deleted from the servers once the transcript is generated. Single sign-on with SCIM, a super admin role, encryption at rest and in transit and SOC 2 Type II are documented, while admin policies on auto-recording and sharing, audit logs and export of the whole archive are not; on AI training the captured pages give different signals, with the trust center stating personal data is not used to train its models and the privacy policy listing model improvement on the basis of consent. 6 8 10 11
The Data Protection Officer
Audio is stated to be deleted from servers the moment the transcript is generated, SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS 4.0 and HIPAA are listed, and encryption at rest and in transit, SSO with SCIM, restricted engineering access and a subprocessor list with locations at the trust center are documented. Two things keep me from a bank-grade verdict: the privacy policy shares transcripts for summaries with an authorized third-party service provider whose name, region and retention commitment are not given, and the security page's assurance that personal data is not used to train AI models stands next to a privacy policy that lists improving proprietary AI models on the basis of consent — the captured pages give different positions on training. We also found no public information on admin-configurable retention periods, audit logs or legal hold. 6 7 8 9 10
The IT Lead
Single sign-on and SCIM, a super admin role, manager view and centralized billing sit on the higher plans, SOC 2 Type II with a CAIQ self-assessment is published, encryption in transit and at rest is stated, audio is deleted from the servers once the transcript is generated, private on-device transcription is offered on Enterprise, and a subprocessor list is available in the trust center. What I could not govern from the captured pages: central retention periods, admin policies on auto-recording and external sharing, and customer-facing audit logs; the privacy policy lists proprietary AI model improvement on a consent basis while the trust pages state personal data is not used to train its AI models. 6 8 9 10
The Skeptic
Audio is deleted from the servers as soon as the transcript is generated, SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS 4.0 and HIPAA are stated, encryption covers transit and rest, and SSO with SCIM plus super-admin and manager roles are documented. But the stated default is that recordings and meeting notes are kept until the customer instructs deletion, and we found no public information on retention policies, customer-facing audit logs or export of the whole archive; the trust page states personal data is not used to train its AI models and the privacy policy names consent as the basis for improving proprietary models, and the third-party model that reads transcripts for summaries is unnamed. 6 8 10 11
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
Krisp is a Delaware corporation that primarily processes and stores information in the United States on AWS in Northern Virginia, and meeting transcripts, recordings and summaries are stored on those servers, so my client conversations leave the EEA. Credit where due: subprocessors are published with locations (Cloudflare, HubSpot and Twilio SendGrid, all USA) with the full list in the trust centre, standard contractual clauses module 2 with the UK addendum, an EU representative in Prague and data processing agreements on request are documented. We found no public information on EU hosting as an option. 7 8 9 10
The Sales Team Lead
Krisp Technologies is a Delaware corporation that stores meeting transcripts, recordings and summaries on AWS in Northern Virginia, and the privacy policy says the company primarily processes and stores information in the United States; named subprocessors such as Cloudflare, HubSpot and Twilio SendGrid are all US-based. An EU representative in Prague, SCC Module 2 safeguards and a data processing agreement on request exist, and Enterprise offers private on-device transcription and recordings, but we found no public information on a European hosting option for the meeting assistant. 6 8 9 10
The Works Council Chair
The contracting entity is a Delaware corporation that primarily processes and stores information in the United States on AWS in Northern Virginia, with Cloudflare, HubSpot and Twilio SendGrid as named subprocessors, all USA, and I found no public information on a European hosting option — for our council the meeting content leaves the EU/EEA by design. Standard Contractual Clauses (Module 2), an Article 27 representative in Prague and a data processing agreement on request are documented, which lifts this above the bottom without approaching European hosting. 8 9 10
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is Krisp Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation in Berkeley, meeting transcripts, recordings and summaries are stored on AWS in Northern Virginia, USA, and the listed subprocessors — Cloudflare, HubSpot, Twilio SendGrid — all process in the USA. Transfers rest on Standard Contractual Clauses Module 2 with the UK Addendum, and Article 27 representatives are designated in Prague and Mildenhall. We found no public information on an EU hosting option, and every documented element of the chain sits outside Europe. 8 9 10
The IT Lead
Krisp Technologies, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that stores meeting transcripts, recordings and summaries on AWS in Northern Virginia, USA; Standard Contractual Clauses Module 2 with the UK Addendum, Article 27 representatives in Prague and the UK, a data processing agreement on request, and named subprocessors (Cloudflare, HubSpot, Twilio SendGrid, all USA) are documented. We found no public information on an EU hosting option, so the meeting content itself leaves Europe even though noise-cancellation audio stays on the device. 8 9 10 11
The Skeptic
The chain is transparent but uniformly American: a Delaware corporation storing and processing in the United States on AWS in Northern Virginia, with Cloudflare, HubSpot and Twilio SendGrid named as US subprocessors. SCC Module 2, an EU representative in Prague and a data processing addendum referenced in the terms are real safeguards; we found no public information on any EU hosting option, and the third-party AI provider behind the summaries is not named. 8 9 10
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
Core at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user are public with per-user scaling, storage limits per tier, unlimited transcription, a stated "Save 50%" for annual billing, and a free tier and trial with their features listed. Enterprise — where SSO/SCIM, HIPAA compliance and on-device transcription sit — is custom pricing through sales, and we found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment or the price of extra storage. The pages also give different tier names (Core, Advanced and Enterprise on the pricing page, Business on the integrations page, Pro and Business in the terms). 5 6 9
The Sales Team Lead
Core at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user are published with unlimited transcription and audio recording, daily accent-conversion limits, storage of 10 GB and 60 GB with extra-storage add-ons, and monthly-versus-annual billing stated as 'Save 50%', plus an advertised free tier. Enterprise, where SSO, SCIM and on-device transcription sit, is quoted as 'Custom Pricing Talk to Sales', and we found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment, minimum term or overage handling. 4 6
The Works Council Chair
Core at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user are public, with unlimited transcription, storage of 10 GB and 60 GB per tier, a free tier, and a stated 50 percent annual saving; Enterprise is "Custom Pricing" via sales. I found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment or the price of extra storage up to 2 TB, so the real annual cost is not computable from public pages alone. 4 6
The Data Protection Officer
Core at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user are published with Enterprise on custom pricing, storage from 10 GB to unlimited plus extra storage add-ons up to 5 TB, unlimited transcription and daily accent-conversion hours per tier, a free tier, and a stated 50% saving when billed annually. We found no public information on VAT, minimum term, overage handling or what counts as a seat, the storage add-on carries no price, and the captured pages give different plan names — Core, Advanced and Enterprise on the pricing page against Business and Pro on the integrations page and in the terms. 5 6 9
The IT Lead
Core is listed at $8/mo/user and Advanced at $15/mo/user, with unlimited transcription, per-tier storage (10 GB, 60 GB, unlimited), daily accent-conversion quotas, extra storage up to 2TB or 5TB, a stated "Save 50%" on annual billing, and a free tier with a trial. The seat price that would hold at my 400 users is not computable, because single sign-on, SCIM and on-device transcription sit on Enterprise with custom pricing through sales, and we found no public information on what counts as a seat, minimum seats or VAT treatment; the captured pages also name the plan tiers differently. 4 5 6 9
The Skeptic
Per-seat prices are public for the two lower tiers ($8/mo/user and $15/mo/user) with storage quotas, unlimited transcription, daily accent-conversion hour limits and support levels per tier, plus a free tier and a free trial. The Enterprise tier is "Custom Pricing" with "Talk to Sales", and we found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment, minimum term or overage handling. 4 6 9
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 | 9 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Outside the EU ⚠ unverified | 0/4 pts | 8 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 Krisp AI Meeting Assistant
Is Krisp AI Meeting Assistant European?
No. whats-best.ai classifies Krisp AI Meeting Assistant as Rest of world. Its vendor, Krisp Technologies, Inc., is incorporated in United States, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
Where does Krisp AI Meeting Assistant store data?
Krisp AI Meeting Assistant 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 Krisp AI Meeting Assistant have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 5 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Krisp AI Meeting Assistant?
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: Krisp AI Meeting Assistant 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. Voice audio is processed locally on the user's device, but meeting transcripts, recordings and summaries are stored on US servers, so customer data leaves the EU/EEA.
- 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.
- 47 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
- 22 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
- 6 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 data 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 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 support fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (AI meeting assistant) krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (AI notetaker) krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (meeting transcription) krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Integrations page krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Pricing page krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Security / trust page krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Trust center trust.krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Terms of service krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Privacy policy (names the operating company) krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Recording, transcription & languages — found from sitemap krisp.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →