whats-best.ai

Project Management & Collaboration

Asana

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven

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

by Asana, Inc. · asana.com

Work management platform for teams and enterprises.

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

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

The Data Protection Officer

Weighted verdict

Reads the DPA before the feature list. Optimizes for GDPR posture: EU hosting, subprocessor exposure, deletion guarantees. Rejects anything that cannot answer where the data lives.

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

Scored by The Data Protection Officer

Collaboration depth

How this is scored

How much real multi-person project work the tool carries: shared planning, assignments, dependencies, workload, comments, guest access.

0 — A personal task list; a second user has no defined place in it.

3 — Tasks can be shared and assigned, but planning stays per-person — no shared timeline, workload or dependency view.

5 — Solid shared projects with assignments, comments and at least one team-level planning view; gaps appear in cross-project or capacity planning.

8 — Team-level planning is first-class: cross-project views, workload/capacity, dependencies, guest or client access with sane permissions.

10 — Handles the full span from two freelancers to a structured department in one model — planning, capacity, permissions and client involvement all without workarounds.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

Dependencies, milestones and deadline alerts sit in the core, Portfolios roll work up across the organization, and Workload gives a real capacity view with drag-and-drop rebalancing and role filtering; guests are unlimited and free on paid tiers with guest permission management at Enterprise. The free plan caps at two users and Workload and Portfolios arrive only at Business, so the span from two freelancers to a department is not one uninterrupted model. 7 8 2

Report an error

Reporting

How this is scored

Whether the tool can answer questions about the work: progress, time, budgets, utilization — and export the answer.

0 — No reporting beyond looking at the board.

3 — Fixed per-project status views only; nothing aggregates across projects and nothing exports cleanly.

5 — Useful standard reports (progress, tracked time) with basic filters and CSV export, but limited customization and no budget/utilization depth.

8 — Configurable cross-project reporting incl. time, budgets and utilization, with dashboards and reliable exports.

10 — Reporting is a product in itself: custom report builder, scheduled delivery, API access to every metric the UI shows.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

Universal Reporting brings cross-project, real-time dashboards covering workload, budget and timing, backed by a chart template library, a custom chart builder, filtering and drill-through to the underlying work. Export paths are credible — full-domain export via the API and BI tool support — and timesheets and budgets exist as an Enterprise add-on; I found no public information on scheduled report delivery, which keeps it below the very top band. 10 9 3 2

Report an error

Integrations

How this is scored

How well the tool connects to the rest of the stack: native integrations, calendar/comms hooks, API and webhooks, import/export paths.

0 — A closed box — no API, no integrations, CSV out if anything.

3 — A handful of marquee integrations, no public API or an API that covers a fraction of the product.

5 — The common set (calendar, Slack/Teams, file storage) plus a documented public API; automation platforms partially covered.

8 — Broad native catalogue, well-documented API and webhooks, first-class automation-platform support and real import paths from competitors.

10 — Ecosystem-grade: everything in 8 plus the tool is itself extensible (apps/plugins, AI/MCP surfaces) and exit via API export is complete.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

The catalogue claims 200+ apps with Slack, Teams and email covered, the REST API is documented and free with any account and monitored on Stack Overflow, and a first-party CSV importer pulls Excel, Smartsheet, Wrike, Monday.com, Airtable and Trello. I found no public information on webhooks or automation-platform support, so I stop one step short of the top band. 11 7 12 13

Report an error

Onboarding effort

How this is scored

Time and friction from signup to first real value for a small team, without paid services.

0 — No self-serve path — onboarding starts with a sales call and an implementation project.

3 — Self-serve exists but the first project requires configuration a newcomer cannot judge yet (workflows, custom fields, permissions) before anything works.

5 — A team gets a first project running within a day; trial requires payment details or key steps live behind docs.

8 — Signup to working project inside an hour: guided setup, sensible defaults, templates, trial without payment details.

10 — Minutes to value even for non-tool-people, importers pull existing work in, and the tool teaches its own advanced features as the team grows into them.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

A free trial with no credit card required, signup through Google or Microsoft, a broad template gallery and a CSV import flow with preview and supported fields mean a team can reach real, imported work quickly. I found no public information on in-product guided setup, so I settle at this band rather than the one above. 7 14 13

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the company and the data actually sit: legal entity, ownership control, data residency, and subprocessor exposure to non-EU jurisdictions.

0 — Non-European vendor, data on US infrastructure under US law, no DPA worth the name.

3 — DPA and GDPR language present, but hosting defaults to the US or ownership sits outside Europe — compliance paperwork over substance.

5 — EU data residency is available and contractually fixed, but the vendor or its controlling owner is non-European, or core subprocessors put data within CLOUD Act reach.

8 — European company under European control with EU-resident data and a public DPA; remaining exposure is limited to identifiable subprocessors (e.g. a US hyperscaler's EU region) and is documented.

10 — European company, European control, EU-only data residency on European infrastructure, subprocessor list free of extraterritorial reach — verifiable, not asserted.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

Asana is a Delaware-incorporated, New York-listed company, data residency in Europe is offered only as an opt-in feature of the top paid tier, and the region of the default hosting is not stated on the captured pages. The GDPR paperwork is real — a named DPO, a DPA incorporated by reference, a transfer impact assessment — yet the privacy policy states data is transferred to regions where subprocessors and partners are located, and while a subprocessor list is listed among the trust documents, the captured pages do not show which processors those are or where they sit. That is compliance language over substance: from these pages I cannot answer where a default customer's data lives. 5 2 3 6 4

Report an error

Support & documentation

How this is scored

Whether a stuck user gets unstuck: docs quality, support channels and their availability per plan, and the health of the learning surface.

0 — No docs beyond marketing pages; support is a contact form that may answer.

3 — Docs exist but are thin or stale; support on entry plans is effectively email-only with slow turnaround.

5 — Searchable help center covering the core product; chat or email support on all plans with reasonable response times.

8 — Deep, current docs incl. onboarding guides and templates; fast chat support not gated to top tiers; visible changelog.

10 — Docs, academy, community and support so good they are a reason to buy; SLAs published, support quality independent of plan.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

The Help Center, a free Academy of 15 video courses with quizzes and a certificate, a community forum and a monitored Stack Overflow channel form a genuinely healthy learning surface. But the published 99.9% uptime commitment and 24/7 priority support are Enterprise-gated, and I found no public information on chat support or response times for the entry plans. 15 12 3 13

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Can a buyer determine the real, payable cost of the tool for their team before talking to anyone?

0 — No public pricing at all — every number sits behind "contact sales".

3 — Some tiers are public, but a deciding factor (seat minimums, mandatory add-ons, billing-period surcharge, tax treatment) only surfaces at checkout or in fine print.

5 — Self-serve tiers are publicly priced and the billing-period difference is stated, but the headline number still needs qualifying — e.g. annual-only headline, taxes excluded without saying so, or an opaque enterprise tier doing real work.

8 — Every self-serve tier is fully priced with billing periods and tax treatment plain on the page; only genuinely custom enterprise work lacks a number.

10 — Every tier including enterprise has a public price or published price formula, and the headline number is the number on the invoice.

Report an error

The Data Protection Officer

Personal, Starter and Advanced are priced publicly at €0, €10.99 and €24.99 per user, per month billed annually, with AI requests priced per request, but the headline is an annual-billed figure, the monthly difference appears only as "Save up to 18%", and tax treatment is not stated. The capabilities that decide an enterprise purchase — data residency, audit logs, timesheets and budgets — sit in an Enterprise tier without a number or in unpriced add-ons, and the page states plainly that refunds are not offered. 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

3 of 4 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.

Ownership Publicly listed 1/2 pts 5 Report an error
Data residency EU optional ⚠ unverified 1/3 pts 3 Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

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.

Sources (16)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage asana.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 18 Aug 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Vendor pricing page asana.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +3 earlier captures: 11 Sep 2026, 11 Sep 2026, 18 Aug 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Trust center asana.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 18 Aug 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Security page asana.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +2 earlier captures: 20 Aug 2026, 18 Aug 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Terms of service asana.com Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Privacy policy asana.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Reporting — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Reporting — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Integrations — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Integrations — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Support & documentation — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Support & documentation — found from sitemap asana.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →