whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Project Management & Collaboration

Fibery

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

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

by Fibery · fibery.io

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

Link to this page

Fibery: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Fibery: 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.

Fibery at a glance

Vendor
Fibery
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Fibery 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Fibery is a modular project management and collaboration platform whose strongest scoring area is integrations, which sit at 8-9: 20+ built-in connectors including Jira, Slack and GitHub, Make and Zapier support, an API that manipulates the data schema and handles webhooks, and an MCP server for custom apps. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources

Fibery alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Enterprise Architect

Weighted verdict

Buys for two hundred seats and answers for it later. Optimizes for SSO/SCIM, permissions, audit trails, certifications and a clean exit. Rejects anything that cannot survive procurement.

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

Scored by The Enterprise Architect

Panel median The Enterprise Architect 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 Enterprise Architect
Collaboration depth 3.5 of 5 3 of 5
Reporting 3 of 5 3 of 5
Integrations 4 of 5 4.5 of 5
Onboarding effort 4 of 5 4 of 5
European sovereignty 1 of 5 0.5 of 5
Support & documentation 4 of 5 4 of 5

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 Enterprise Architect

Real-time collaborative documents with comments, mentions and task creation from text, dependencies visualized on a timeline with automatic date shifts, and permissions from creator to viewer at workspace or group level make shared projects genuinely multi-person. We found no public information on cross-project capacity or workload views, and guest or client access appears only as public sharing of documents, so department-level planning would lean on workarounds. 2 3 5 6

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 Enterprise Architect

Dashboards can be built at the top level or inside projects and teams with charts, metrics and trend tracking, there is a dedicated report view type, formulas, and custom reports creatable via AI or the MCP server. We found no public information on time tracking, budget or utilization reporting, nor any export path for reports, which caps how far these answers travel in a review deck. 1 3 4

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 Enterprise Architect

Twenty-plus native integrations including Slack, Jira, GitHub and HubSpot with automatic sync, Make and Zapier support, an API that creates entities, manipulates the schema and handles webhooks, CSV import, plus custom connectors and integration templates for any external system. The MCP server and custom apps make the platform genuinely extensible; we found no public information confirming a complete export of everything via API for a clean exit. 1 3 5 6 8

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 Enterprise Architect

A 14-day trial without credit card, a template library the vendor says gets a team started in minutes across twenty-plus processes, an AI model that configures the workspace, and import paths from Jira, Trello, Airtable, ClickUp and CSV cover the fast path to a first project. The counterweight is deep configurability: architect mode and fully custom entities mean any non-template setup demands judgment a newcomer will not have yet, and the concierge path runs through four video calls. 1 8 9

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 Enterprise Architect

The vendor says it is crafted in Europe and trades as Fibery Limited, but servers sit on AWS with no data region stated, and we found no public information on the entity's jurisdiction, ownership, a data processing agreement or any subprocessor list. Nothing here would survive a two-hundred-seat procurement review; the SOC 2 report and IP whitelisting speak to security, not to where the data actually sits. 2 7

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 Enterprise Architect

A user guide with a getting-started section, webinars and tutorials, a developers section and a status page sit alongside a visible, current changelog with monthly entries. Support chat typically answers within fifteen minutes with named humans offering scheduled calls, plus a community, a public roadmap and free expert help including a workspace review; we found no published SLA and no per-plan support terms. 1 7 9

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

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 Enterprise Architect

The only cost facts in public view are a free sign-up, a 14-day trial with no credit card, and six free months for early-stage startups; a Pro plan is referenced in the security pages for SSO and group permissions but carries no number anywhere we can see. A buyer for two hundred seats cannot determine the payable cost before talking to the vendor — no tiers, seat minimums or billing-period prices are published. 1 2 7 8

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 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 Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

Questions about Fibery

Is Fibery European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Fibery is based.

Where does Fibery store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

Does Fibery have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Fibery?

As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates awork (4/5), Kantree (4/5) and Teamwork.com (4/5) highest among the other 60 Project Management & Collaboration 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 awork (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Fibery 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 Fibery? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (9)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page fibery.io Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Privacy policy — found from the homepage fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Reporting — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Integrations — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Integrations — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Support & documentation — found from sitemap fibery.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →