whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Project Management & Collaboration

Trello

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

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

by Atlassian Pty Ltd · trello.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

Free workspaces admit ten collaborators with unlimited cards, card mirroring pulls to-dos from multiple boards into one place, and a template gallery gives a team a shared board from minute one. But we found no public information on workload or capacity views, and dependencies, epics and estimates appear only through a partner Power-Up rather than the core product. 1 2 5 8

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

Real answers exist — time logging on cards, velocity and throughput at team or whole-organization level, exports to Excel or CSV, and scheduled delivery through email or Slack — but they arrive by installing separately-priced partner Power-Ups, a different one for time than for dashboards, rather than out of the box. We found no public information on budget or utilization reporting. 2 7 8

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

A catalogue of 200+ Power-Ups, native hooks for Slack, Microsoft Teams and Google Drive, email forwarded straight into to-dos, and no-code automation built into every board covers the common stack. The captured pages are silent on a public API, webhooks and importer paths from competing tools, which is what keeps this out of the top band. 1 2 7 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 UX Purist

This is the fast path done right: a permanent free tier for up to 10 collaborators with unlimited cards, no payment mentioned anywhere in it, and a template gallery whose kanban starter explains itself — lists are task categories, cards are tasks. Automation is present on the very first board. The missing inch is importers pulling existing work in; we found no public information on that. 1 2 5 6

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

The controllers named in the policy are Atlassian Pty Ltd and Atlassian US, Inc., with ownership outside Europe, and the captured policy states information may be stored wherever Atlassian or its third-party providers operate. An EU representative and GDPR rights language exist, but we found no public information on EU data residency or a named subprocessor list — paperwork over substance. 3

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

Support tiers are published plainly — community support only on the free plan, 24/5 Premium support, 24/7 Enterprise admin support — and free video tutorials plus four public community forums give a self-teaching surface. But a stuck user on the free plan has no live channel, and we found no public information on a searchable help center, chat, or published response times. 2 3 7

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

The pricing page is dense with real numbers: every tier from free to Enterprise carries a per-user price with both billing figures printed side by side, free-tier limits are quantified in collaborators, boards, command runs and file size, and the AI add-on at $5 a month and Atlassian Guard at $4/month/user are priced on the page. The gaps: we found no public information on tax treatment, and partner Power-Up fees are acknowledged without a number. 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 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 ⚠ unverified 1/2 pts 3 Report an error
Data residency Not determined — uncited 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.

Do you know more about Trello? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (8)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage trello.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Vendor pricing page trello.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy trello.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 11 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Security page trello.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap trello.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Collaboration depth — found from sitemap trello.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Reporting — found from sitemap trello.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Reporting — found from sitemap trello.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →