Project Management & Collaboration
Stackfield
EU-Made Report an errorPanel 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 Stackfield GmbH · www.stackfield.com
Compare with monday.com → 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 panel's verdict
Stackfield, a project management and collaboration tool from Stackfield GmbH of Munich, scores strongest on sovereignty — scores hold at 8 with no spread — and on collaboration depth at 7-8, credited for four dependency types with automatic rescheduling, a critical path and cross-project portfolios from the Premium plan. Pricing transparency is where the judges genuinely split: scores run from 6 to 9 over the same two gaps — no monthly-billed price is published and the On-Premise edition carries no figure — so they differ on weight, not facts, with every tier otherwise priced publicly from Starter at € 9 to Enterprise at € 28 per User and Month (when paid yearly). The weakest criteria are reporting at 4-6 and integrations at 4-6: reports are printable and exportable but we found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization, and the API is capped at one request per second with user and room management reserved for Enterprise. On data location the captured pages give different figures, the privacy policy also allowing USA processing under the Data Privacy Framework.
Speaks for it
- Sovereignty scores hold at 8 with no spread, on a Munich-registered GmbH stating exclusive German and EU jurisdiction, German data centers, ISO 27001, BSI C5, ISO 27017 and 27018, and a GDPR agreement signable in a few clicks
- Collaboration depth scores at 7-8, on four dependency types with automatic rescheduling and a critical path, cross-project portfolios from the Premium plan, and unlimited free External-role users from Premium
- All four tiers carry public yearly per-user prices from Starter at € 9 to Enterprise at € 28, with the AI add-on at € 3,90, the OFFICE add-on at € 2,40, and Starter's caps printed as max. 3 Rooms and max. 10 Users
- Onboarding is self-serve: a 14-day trial with "No credit card required" and "No minimum contract period", plus a video-covered Excel import for task boards from other tools
- Support documentation scores 6-7, with a deep help center, video tutorials and support channels spanning live chat, email, phone and screen sharing via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex
Held against it
- Reporting scores sit at 4-6, with no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization and no export format named on the captured pages
- Integrations scores sit at 4-6: the API is capped at one request per second, task operations are Premium-and-up and unencrypted-rooms-only, user and room management are Enterprise-only, and we found no public information on native Slack, Teams or calendar connectors
- Only yearly-billed prices are published — the page shows "Yearly (SAVE 17 %)" without monthly figures — and the On-Premise edition appears with no price
- The captured pages give different figures on where personal data may be processed, with the privacy policy allowing EU-classified safe countries and Data Privacy Framework-certified USA processing, and naming Giphy Inc. of New York as an administrator-activated integration
- We found no public information on a workload or capacity view, on ownership control of the company, or on published support response times
Best for
- You need a Germany-registered vendor stating exclusive German and EU jurisdiction, hosting in German data centers and certifications such as ISO 27001 and BSI C5 for your procurement file
- You run schedule-driven projects where Gantt planning — four dependency types, automatic rescheduling, a critical path — matters more than time and budget reporting
- You want a published per-user price for every tier before talking to sales, and yearly billing suits you
- Your small team wants a self-serve start: a 14-day trial without a credit card and an Excel import that pulls existing task boards in
Avoid if
- You expect to sync heavily through the API — the documented cap is one request per second, task operations require Premium and work only in unencrypted rooms, and user provisioning and room management sit in Enterprise
- Your reporting needs include time tracking, budgets or utilization, where the bench's scores sit at 4-6 on those gaps
- Your compliance review cannot accept any USA transfer — the privacy policy allows Data Privacy Framework-certified USA processing and documents Giphy Inc. of New York as an administrator-activated integration
- You need monthly-billed or On-Premise pricing up front — only yearly figures are published and the on-premise offering carries no number
The scores
Collaboration depth
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Tasks carry assignments, comments, subtasks and dependencies in four types with critical path and automatic planning, and Project Portfolios from Premium aggregate across projects; Guest and External roles, with unlimited free externals from Premium, give client access alongside permission notes like local links not extending access. What tempers it is capacity: the member perspective shows per-person task counts, and we found no public information on workload or capacity planning. 6 7 8 9 15
The Bootstrapper
Real team planning is evidenced: Gantt with four dependency types, automatic planning and critical path, cross-project portfolios from the Premium plan, and guest/external roles with unlimited free externals. It sits just under the top band because we found no public information on a dedicated workload or capacity view beyond the My Week member overview. 6 7 8 9 15
The Enterprise Architect
Shared project work is real here: Gantt views with four dependency types, automatic rescheduling of dependent successors, a critical path and a network diagram, plus cross-project portfolios from the Premium plan and free, unlimited external guests with distinct guest and external roles. What I could not find is any workload or capacity view across people, which is exactly what I need before committing two hundred seats. 6 7 8 9 15
The UX Purist
Planning is genuinely first-class: four dependency types, automatic rescheduling, a critical path and a network diagram, with cross-project work through portfolios and Gantt filtering across rooms and room groups. Guest and External roles with free unlimited externals handle client access with sane restrictions. Capacity is the thin spot — the member perspective counts each person's tasks but I found no public information on a true workload or capacity view. 6 7 8 9 15
The Integrator
Team-level planning is first-class: assignments, comments and subtasks on tasks, four dependency types with automatic rescheduling and a critical path, cross-project portfolios from Premium, and a member perspective that shows all members' schedules together. Guest and External roles come with sane permissions — local links never extend existing access — and unlimited externals are free from Premium. We found no public information on a dedicated workload or capacity view, which keeps this below the very top. 6 7 8 9 15
The Skeptic
Assignments, comments, four dependency types with automatic planning and a critical path, plus cross-project portfolios from Premium are all documented, and the External role comes free from Premium with permission boundaries spelled out (local links do not extend access). We found no public information on a workload or capacity view — the member perspective only counts tasks by status — so I stop short of the top. 6 7 8 9 15
Reporting
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Reports can be grouped by status, custom fields and rooms, exported and printed, with cross-project monitoring via portfolios and login reporting on the security side. We found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization reporting, so this stays in the middle of the scale. 7 8 9
The Bootstrapper
Standard progress reporting is there — grouping by status, custom fields and rooms, task-status counts, cross-project portfolio monitoring, printable and exportable reports. But we found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization, and the export format is not specified, which caps it at the middle band. 7 8 9
The Enterprise Architect
There are useful standard reports — task status counts, grouping by status, assignee, custom fields and rooms, printable and exportable, plus login and settings-change reporting — but everything captured is task-centric. I found no public information on time tracking, budget or utilization reporting, no custom report builder and no scheduled delivery, so the reporting answers progress questions but not money questions. 3 7 8 9
The UX Purist
Standard reports aggregate task status across rooms, group by status, field or room, and can be exported and printed, with per-member task counts on the dashboard and login reporting on top. I found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization, and the export format is never named — that caps it well short of configurable cross-project analytics. 3 7 9
The Integrator
Reports exist with grouping by status, custom fields and rooms, filtering by person and label, export and printing, and portfolio monitoring across projects — but we found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization, and the export format is not specified. Nothing captured resembles a custom report builder, a dashboard beyond the status counts of the My Week view, or scheduled delivery. 7 8 9
The Skeptic
Reports exist, group by status, custom fields and rooms, are printable and exportable, and the dashboard aggregates task counts per member with cross-project portfolios to monitor multiple projects. We found no public information on time tracking, budgets or utilization, and no export format is ever named, which keeps this below the configurable-reporting standard. 3 7 8 9
Integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
A documented API with JWT-secured incoming webhooks, an email integration, and an Excel import path exist, and Zapier/IFTTT automation is covered webhook-style in a blog guide. But task reading and updating sit behind Premium and organization/user management behind Enterprise, the API handles one request per second, and we found no public information on native Slack or Teams integrations. 10 11 13
The Bootstrapper
There is a documented public API for reading and editing tasks plus incoming webhooks secured with JWT, an email-forwarding integration, and an Excel import that pulls task boards from other tools. The catalogue is thin: task API access needs Premium, management endpoints need Enterprise, the rate limit is one request per second, and we found no public information on native Slack, Teams or external calendar integrations. 10 11 13
The Enterprise Architect
A documented API with task read and write, custom fields, incoming webhooks with optional JWT signing, and a guide for wiring Zapier and IFTTT, together with a genuinely deep email-forwarding integration and an Excel import path for boards from other tools, gives a solid connective layer. Two things hold me back: user provisioning and admin endpoints sit only in the Enterprise package, the rate limit is one request per second, and I found no public information on native calendar, Slack or Teams integrations. 2 10 11 13
The UX Purist
There is a documented public API covering tasks and custom fields, incoming webhooks with optional JWT, and an email integration deep enough to run a shared mailbox; Zapier and IFTTT are reachable through webhook guides, and an Excel importer with a video pulls boards in from other tools. I found no public information on native Slack, Teams or file-storage integrations, the API processes at most one request per second, task endpoints are Premium-and-up and admin endpoints sit in Enterprise. 10 11 13
The Integrator
A documented developer API reads and edits tasks including custom fields, incoming webhooks accept JSON payloads across six content types with optional JWT signing, and a guide covers wiring them to Zapier and IFTTT; deep email-to-task forwarding and an Excel importer for boards from other tools round it out. But the API tops out at one request per second, task endpoints work only in unencrypted rooms, and user, room and settings management sit behind Enterprise. We found no public information on native calendar, Slack or Teams connectors, or on file-storage integrations. 10 11 13
The Skeptic
There is a documented API with JWT-secured incoming webhooks across several content types, and a video shows importing boards from other tools via Excel. But we found no public information on native calendar, Slack/Teams or file-storage integrations, the API is capped at one request per second, excludes end-to-end encrypted rooms, gates task operations behind Premium and pushes user/room management to Enterprise — Zapier and IFTTT only appear reachable through hand-rolled webhooks. 10 11 13
Onboarding effort
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Self-serve is genuine: a 14-day trial without credit card, no minimum contract period, and an Excel import that pulls task boards from other tools in. We found no public information on templates or guided in-product setup, so I cannot verify the first hour of work. 2 13
The Bootstrapper
A 14-day trial with no credit card required, self-serve signup and a genuine import path for existing task boards get a small team moving fast. I hold it below the top band because we found no public information on guided setup or templates, and the Gantt view requires activating the Timeline module before anything shows. 2 7 12 13
The Enterprise Architect
The path is self-serve and low-friction: a fourteen-day trial with no credit card, no minimum contract period, and a video walkthrough for importing existing task boards from other tools via Excel. I found no public information on guided setup flows or ready-made project templates, so I cannot confirm signup-to-working-project inside an hour. 2 6 12 13
The UX Purist
Fourteen days free with no credit card and no minimum contract is exactly right, self-serve tiers are one click away, and the Excel import video is a real importer for existing work. I found no public information on in-app guided setup or templates, and a newcomer must judge some configuration before power features appear — the Gantt view requires activating the Timeline module and email forwarding needs organization-level enablement. 2 7 11 13
The Integrator
A fourteen-day trial needs no credit card and carries no minimum contract, self-serve tiers go live with Get Started buttons, and an Excel importer plus video tutorials pull existing task boards in on day one. Real friction hides in module prerequisites: the Gantt view needs the Timeline module activated, dependencies need the schedule module, and email integration needs organization-level enablement before anything flows. We found no public information on guided setup walks or project templates. 2 7 11 13
The Skeptic
Self-serve signup with a 14-day trial, "No credit card required" and "No minimum contract period" is published, and video tutorials cover an Excel import for pulling existing boards in. We found no public information on guided setup or templates, so I cannot credit the fast lane to the top. 2 12 13 14
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Stackfield GmbH is registered in Munich, states it is subject exclusively to German and EU jurisdiction with the US Cloud and Patriot Acts not enforceable, stores data in German data centers, and lets you conclude the GDPR agreement in a few clicks. The captured pages give different figures for where processing occurs — the security page says exclusively EU, the privacy policy says EU plus countries classified as safe by the EU and Data Privacy Framework-certified US services — and Giphy Inc. of New York is documented as an administrator-activated integration, which is identifiable and disclosed but keeps this short of EU-only. 3 4 5
The Bootstrapper
A German GmbH registered in Munich, hosting in German data centers, a DPA concluded in a few clicks, and a security page claiming exclusively EU-based subcontractors beyond non-EU control. The captured pages give different figures for where data may be processed — the privacy policy allows EU-classified safe countries and, under the Data Privacy Framework, the USA, and names Giphy Inc. of New York as an in-platform integration — so it is documented exposure, not a closed question. 3 4 5
The Enterprise Architect
This is the strongest part of the file for procurement: a Munich GmbH with a commercial register entry, subject only to German and EU jurisdiction with an explicit statement that the Cloud and Patriot Acts cannot be enforced, ISO 27001, BSI C5, ISO 27017 and 27018, a click-through DPA, and a subcontractor policy that excludes AWS, Google Cloud and Azure. The captured pages give different figures for processing location — the security page says servers in the EU including telemetry, while the privacy policy allows EU-classified safe countries and, under the Data Privacy Framework, the USA for an administrator-activated Giphy integration — so the residual exposure is identifiable and documented rather than clean, and I found no public information on ownership control. 3 4 5
The UX Purist
A German GmbH in Munich under German and EU jurisdiction only, EU-resident data in German data centers, a DPA you can conclude in a few clicks, and a named EU subcontractor list that explicitly excludes AWS, Google Cloud and Azure. The captured pages give different scopes for where data may be processed: the security page says exclusively EU including telemetry, while the privacy policy also allows safe third countries and Data Privacy Framework-certified US processing for an admin-activated Giphy integration — exposure that is identified and documented rather than hidden. 3 4 5
The Integrator
A Munich-registered GmbH stating it is subject exclusively to German and EU jurisdiction — with the Cloud Act and Patriot Act called unenforceable — hosted in German data centers carrying ISO 27001, BSI C5, ISO 27017 and 27018, with a public DPA signable in a few clicks and named EU subcontractors that explicitly exclude AWS, Google Cloud and Azure. The remaining exposure is identifiable and documented: the privacy policy discloses EU-approved third-country processing, USA transfers under the Data Privacy Framework, and an administrator-activated Giphy integration in New York. The captured pages give different figures on where personal data may be processed, and ownership control is not evidenced, so this stops short of the top. 3 4 5
The Skeptic
A Munich GmbH under exclusive German and EU jurisdiction, EU-resident data with a click-through DPA, a named data protection officer, BSI C5 and ISO 27001 claims, and a published subprocessor list of German and Estonian firms make the core substance real. The privacy policy nonetheless concedes processing in countries the EU deems safe and, under the Data Privacy Framework, in the USA — and the administrator-activated Giphy integration sits in New York — while we found no public information establishing who ultimately controls the company. 3 4 5
Support & documentation
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Live chat, email, phone and screen-sharing sessions via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex sit alongside a deep help center with video tutorials. The only service level agreement evidenced covers platform availability, and we found no public information on support response times, per-plan gating, or a changelog. 3 13 14 15
The Bootstrapper
Live chat, a support channel, email, phone and screen-sharing sessions via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex, backed by a detailed help center with video tutorials and how-to blog articles. It stops short of the top band because we found no public information on published response times or a visible changelog. 10 12 13 14 15
The Enterprise Architect
The help center is deep and current — dependency types, webhook JWT configuration, five password policy levels, plan-by-plan feature pages — and support runs live chat, email, phone and screen sharing via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex, with availability assured through a service level agreement. I found no public information on published response times per plan or a visible changelog, which is what keeps this one step below the top tier. 3 7 10 14 15
The UX Purist
The help center runs deep — the Gantt article spells out four dependency types, working-day logic and cycle prevention — and video tutorials sit on top. Support spans live chat, email, phone and screen-share sessions via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex. I found no public information on response-time commitments per plan, a changelog, or community and academy surfaces. 7 14 15
The Integrator
The help center runs deep — granular articles on Gantt dependencies, dashboards, email integration and plan functions, plus video tutorials and a blog — and support spans live chat, a support channel, email, phone and screen-sharing sessions via Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex, with presentation hours published as Monday to Friday, 10:00 to 17:00. We found no public information on a visible changelog, on response-time SLAs beyond an availability assurance, or on any plan-gating of chat support. 7 13 14 15
The Skeptic
Live chat, a support channel, email and phone are published, screen-sharing sessions are offered over Stackfield, TeamViewer or Webex, and the help center runs deep across Gantt, email integration, the dashboard and the developer API. We found no public information on a visible changelog, published support response times, or which plans get which channel — the service level agreement on offer covers platform availability, not support. 3 10 14
Pricing transparency
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Data Protection Officer
Every tier including Enterprise carries a public price — Starter at € 9, Business at € 14, Premium at € 18 and Enterprise at € 28 per User and Month when paid yearly — with both add-ons priced, a stated 17 % yearly saving, and the page saying all prices are quoted net and exclusive of VAT. The only gap is that the captured pages show yearly figures only, with no monthly-billing price quoted. 2
The Bootstrapper
Every tier including Enterprise carries a public per-user price — Starter € 9, Business € 14, Premium € 18, Enterprise € 28, all per user and month when paid yearly — with add-ons priced, VAT treatment stated in plain words, no minimum contract period and a trial without credit card. The single gap: every headline number is the yearly-billed figure, and no monthly price is published. 2
The Enterprise Architect
Every plan carries a public number on the page — Starter at € 9, Business at € 14, Premium at € 18 and Enterprise at € 28 per user and month when paid yearly — with add-ons priced separately (AI at € 3,90, OFFICE at € 2,40), net pricing excluding VAT stated, the yearly billing basis named and the 17 % yearly saving shown. The only figures I could not find are the monthly-billed rates and a price for the on-premise edition, so a buyer can determine almost the whole invoice before talking to anyone. 2
The UX Purist
Every tier carries a public number — "€ 9", "€ 14", "€ 18" and even "€ 28" per User and Month (when paid yearly) for Enterprise — with add-ons priced separately and the page stating plainly "All prices are quoted net and exclusive of VAT". The headline numbers are all yearly-billed figures; the page flags "Yearly (SAVE 17 %)" but I found no public information on the monthly-billed prices themselves, and the on-premise offering appears without a price. 2
The Integrator
All four tiers carry public per-user prices quoted exactly as net and exclusive of VAT, the yearly option states its saving, plan caps like three rooms and ten users on Starter are printed, and both add-ons — OFFICE and AI — are priced on the same page. The monthly-billing figure appears only as the stated yearly saving rather than as a printed number, and we found no public information on a price for the On-Premise edition. That still leaves only genuinely custom work without a number. 2
The Skeptic
Every tier carries an exact figure — "€ 9", "€ 14", "€ 18", "€ 28 per User and Month (when paid yearly)" — with priced add-ons (AI at "€ 3,90", OFFICE at "€ 2,40"), VAT treatment stated as quoted net and exclusive of VAT, and Starter's room and user caps shown up front. But every headline number is the yearly-billed one: a monthly option is implied by "Yearly (SAVE 17 %)" without its price being published, and the on-premise offering appears with no number at all. 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
3 of 4 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 DE | 3/3 pts | 5 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU only ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 3 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | EU only ⚠ unverified | 2/2 pts | 3 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 16 Sep 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 residency. The privacy policy (S4) concedes that personal data may also be processed in 'countries classified as safe or appropriate by the EU' and, with Data Privacy Framework certification, in the USA, so the EU-only claim rests on this security-page statement.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. The privacy policy (S4) discloses that the administrator-activated Giphy integration (Giphy Inc., New York, USA) is used inside the Stackfield platform and may transfer personal data to the USA under the Data Privacy Framework.
- 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.
- 12 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
- 6 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
- 4 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
- 1 pricing 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
Sources (15)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Vendor pricing page www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Security page www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Imprint www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Reporting — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Reporting — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Integrations — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Integrations — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Support & documentation — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Support & documentation — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →