whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Project Management & Collaboration

Stackfield

EU-Made 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 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 Integrator

Weighted verdict

Lives in the API docs before the product tour. Optimizes for webhooks, import/export and a tool that plays well in a stack. Rejects closed ecosystems and CSV-only exits.

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

Scored by The Integrator

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 Stackfield? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (15)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Vendor pricing page www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Security page www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Privacy policy www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Imprint www.stackfield.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Reporting — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Reporting — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Integrations — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Integrations — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Onboarding effort — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Support & documentation — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Support & documentation — found from sitemap www.stackfield.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →