AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers

Krisp AI Meeting Assistant

Rest of world Report an error

Panel 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

An AI-assisted analysis of public evidence — not a hands-on test.

Every score, rationale and verdict on this page is AI-generated. Every claim cites the source it was read from. Nothing here is a human star review — and no score can be bought. How scores are made →

Method and versions

The Management Consultant v1.0 · The Sales Team Lead v1.0 · The Works Council Chair v1.0 · The Data Protection Officer v1.0 · The IT Lead v1.0 · The Skeptic v1.0 · rubric v1 · evaluated 6 Nov 2026

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

HTML

<a href="https://whats-best.ai/software/meeting-assistants/krisp"><img src="https://whats-best.ai/badge/meeting-assistants/krisp.svg" alt="Krisp AI Meeting Assistant: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai" height="66"></a>

Markdown

[![Krisp AI Meeting Assistant: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai](https://whats-best.ai/badge/meeting-assistants/krisp.svg)](https://whats-best.ai/software/meeting-assistants/krisp)

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 Management Consultant

Weighted verdict

Partner at a twelve-person management consultancy in Munich with six client calls a day, half in German, half in English, and workshops in the client's meeting room. Writes the minutes at night and wants that to stop. Wants accurate German transcripts with the right names, minutes by meeting type with decisions and action items, capture of in-person workshops without a laptop on the table, and a promise in writing that client conversations train nobody's model.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Management Consultant

Panel median The Management Consultant This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.

Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion	Panel median	The Management Consultant
Recording, transcription & languages	3.5 of 5	3.5 of 5
Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge	3 of 5	3 of 5
Integrations, API & workflow	3.5 of 5	3.5 of 5
Consent, participant rights & works council	1.5 of 5	1.5 of 5
Retention, AI training & administration	3 of 5	3 of 5
European sovereignty	2 of 5	2 of 5
Pricing transparency	3 of 5	2.5 of 5

Recording, transcription & languages

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Integrations, API & workflow

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Consent, participant rights & works council

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Retention, AI training & administration

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

2 of 6 dimensions proven

Built 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

Do you know more about Krisp AI Meeting Assistant? Tell us Report an error on this page

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 →