whats-best.ai

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 UX Purist

Weighted verdict

Measures time-to-first-value with a stopwatch. Optimizes for clarity, density and software that teaches itself. Rejects fourteen-step setups and empty screens that offer no way forward.

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

Scored by The UX Purist

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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.

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 →