whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers

Otter.ai

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 6 dimensions proven

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Otter.ai, Inc. · otter.ai

Compare with Jamie → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Otter.ai: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Otter.ai: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

Otter.ai at a glance

Vendor
Otter.ai, Inc.
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 5 Nov 2026
Data hosting
Outside the EU by default 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 Otter.ai 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Otter.ai is an AI meeting assistant from Otter.ai, Inc., a Delaware company based in Mountain View, California. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 5 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 6 Nov 2026. all sources

Otter.ai alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Skeptic

Weighted verdict

Has seen "99% accuracy in 100 languages" turn a German meeting into English nonsense, a bot that joined a meeting its owner never attended and mailed the summary to every guest, and an action item no one in the room had agreed to. Asks which model wrote the summary and where it runs, whether each statement can be traced to the transcript, who told the external participants, what "we do not train on your data" covers in the DPA — and how the archive leaves.

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

Scored by The Skeptic

Panel median The Skeptic 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 Skeptic
Recording, transcription & languages 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge 3 of 5 3.5 of 5
Integrations, API & workflow 3.5 of 5 4 of 5
Consent, participant rights & works council 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
Retention, AI training & administration 2 of 5 2 of 5
European sovereignty 2 of 5 1.5 of 5
Pricing transparency 3 of 5 3 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 Skeptic

A bot joins Zoom, Teams and Google Meet while a desktop app and a Chrome extension record without a bot, in-person capture runs on iOS and Android, calls arrive via Zoom Phone, RingCentral and Salesloft, and German sits among six languages with custom vocabulary, editable time-coded transcripts and live captions. We found no public information on Webex, mixed-language meetings or accuracy per language — and the terms expressly make no warranty about the completeness or accuracy of the transcription, which is exactly the clause a regulated team should read before trusting a word. 2 3 5 6

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 Skeptic

Templates per plan, action items pushed into JIRA, Asana and ClickUp with deadlines, follow-up emails drafted in Work Mode, keyword and sentiment tracking across meetings, and an AI chat over the whole archive, with Anthropic and OpenAI named on the subprocessor list for AI functionality. But I always ask which passage a summary sentence came from: we found no public information on answers that cite and link the transcript passage they rest on, on the summary language being selectable, or on how hallucinations are handled. 3 4 5 8

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 Skeptic

Calendars auto-join meetings, Salesforce, HubSpot, Microsoft Dynamics, Zoho and Monday.com take the CRM output, Slack, Notion, SharePoint and OneDrive receive the notes, Zapier and viaSocket automate further, an API with webhooks ships on Enterprise, and an MCP server for AI assistants is listed from the Basic plan up. We found no public information on API rate limits, versioning, OAuth scope granularity or whether residency survives the export, so treat this as a rich catalogue rather than a documented platform contract. 3 4 5

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 Skeptic

There are good bones — central admin controls, audit logging, SSO and SCIM on Enterprise, bulk export, and a trash folder whose permanent deletion leaves no record — but the documented default is that Otter trains its proprietary AI on audio recordings and transcriptions, escaped only by an opt-out you must request from your account manager, and aggregated data use continues regardless. We found no public information on configurable retention periods, discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, or ISO 27001 and SOC 2 certifications; the only stated security marks are TLS and AES-256. 4 5 6 7

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 Skeptic

Everything I can trace runs through the United States: a Delaware-registered company in Mountain View, storage on Amazon Web Services "based in the United States", and a subprocessor list in which every provider — AWS, Google Cloud, Anthropic, OpenAI, Stripe, Zendesk, WorkOS — sits in the US, with Standard Contractual Clauses and the Data Privacy Framework as the stated safeguards. A GDPR data-processing agreement exists in the terms and the chain is at least named honestly, but we found no public information on any EU hosting option for the conversations themselves. 6 7 8

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 Skeptic

Per-tier detail is unusually good — minutes, import limits, chat queries, concurrent meetings and export formats per plan, with Pro at $8.33 /user/month and Business at $19.99 /user/month — but Enterprise is a sales call, the HIPAA add-on and RTMP live transcription carry unstated additional fees, SSO and SCIM require a minimum 100-user license, and the captured pages give different figures for Business transcription minutes, 6,000 on one page and unlimited on another. VAT treatment is unstated and fees are described as non-refundable, so a buyer cannot compute the true annual cost from the public pages alone. 4 5 6

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 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.

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 — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about Otter.ai

Is Otter.ai European?

No. whats-best.ai classifies Otter.ai as Rest of world.

Where does Otter.ai store data?

Otter.ai stores customer data outside the EU by default, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.

Does Otter.ai have a free plan?

Yes. Otter.ai has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Otter.ai?

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: Otter.ai alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

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.

Do you know more about Otter.ai? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (8)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Features page otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Integrations page otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Features page (enterprise) otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Pricing page otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Terms of service otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Privacy policy otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Subprocessor list otter.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →