whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Stable & Equestrian Management

DigiStable

EU-Made 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 Hof Ohana · www.digistable.de

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

Link to this page

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

DigiStable at a glance

Vendor
Hof Ohana
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 16 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 16 Oct 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 16 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates DigiStable 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. DigiStable, from Hof Ohana in Bargteheide, Germany, is a smartphone-first, modular stable management app with prepaid credit for extra services. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 16 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 16 Oct 2026. all sources

DigiStable alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Boarding-Stable Owner

Weighted verdict

Runs a forty-box Pensionsstall and loses a few hundred euros a month to blanket changes and leg wraps nobody wrote down. Wants extra services logged where they happen and billed without retyping, direct debit that collects on time, and one system instead of a spreadsheet and three WhatsApp groups.

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

Scored by The Boarding-Stable Owner

Panel median The Boarding-Stable Owner 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 Boarding-Stable Owner
Board contracts, extra services & billing 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
Horse records, feeding & health 2 of 5 2.5 of 5
Staff, rotas & daily operations 1 of 5 1 of 5
Boarder portal & communication 2 of 5 2 of 5
Facilities, lessons & events 1 of 5 1 of 5
European sovereignty 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5

Board contracts, extra services & billing

How this is scored

How the stable gets paid: board contracts per box and horse, extra services logged at the moment they are done, prepaid credit, recurring invoices, SEPA direct debit, VAT treatment that a tax adviser accepts, and an export to the accountant.

0 — No billing at all; services are noted somewhere and invoiced by hand in another tool.

3 — A list of services or a price table per horse, but invoices are written outside the system and nothing connects a logged service to a charge.

5 — Board contracts and extra services billed from the system: monthly invoices generated from contracts plus logged services, sent to the boarder, with payment status tracked.

8 — Services logged on the phone where they happen flow into the invoice or a prepaid balance automatically, SEPA direct debit with mandates, VAT rates configurable per service type, cancellation and credit notes, and an export to DATEV or a named accounting tool.

10 — The money side is discharged inside the system: GoBD-compliant numbering and archiving stated, e-invoices (XRechnung/ZUGFeRD) supported, prepaid credit with low-balance warnings, dunning, multiple payers per horse (shares, Reitbeteiligung) split correctly, and every charge traceable to the logged service and the staff member who logged it.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

Extra services can be booked through the platform and the privacy policy treats billing data as existing, with retention of six to ten years per commercial and tax law — more than a paper notebook. But we found no public information on monthly invoices generated from contracts, SEPA direct debit, VAT treatment per service, or an export to the accountant, which are exactly the pieces that decide whether my blanket changes actually get collected. 2 3

Report an error

Horse records, feeding & health

How this is scored

The record per horse: master data and passport details, feeding and supplement plans, vaccinations, worming, farrier and vet appointments, medication given, turnout and blanket instructions — kept so that a vet, an inspector or the owner can rely on it, and exportable when the horse leaves.

0 — No horse records beyond a name; care instructions live on a whiteboard.

3 — A profile per horse with free-text notes and perhaps a photo, but no structured feeding plan, no health schedule and no history.

5 — Structured feeding plans per horse shown to staff by feeding round, vaccinations, worming and farrier dates recorded with reminders, and appointments per horse in a calendar.

8 — Health records with due dates to the FN/LPO vaccination schedule, a medication log with dose, date and who administered it, owner instructions (blankets, turnout, special feed) visible to whoever does the round, and a full history per horse exportable as a document.

10 — A record that stands up to scrutiny: medication documentation meeting the TAMG duties for food-producing equines stated, passport and UELN data held, every change attributed and dated, vet and farrier entries from external professionals possible, and the complete file handed to a new stable in a documented export format.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

The captured pages name feeding plans, box, paddock and turnout, vaccination and farrier dates, medication, vet reports and observations kept in the app by staff and boarders, with photos for documentation and notifications for appointments — that reads as structured plans and a health trail per horse rather than a whiteboard. We found no public information on vaccination schedules to the association calendar, who administered what and when, or an export of the horse's file when it leaves my yard. 2 3

Report an error

Staff, rotas & daily operations

How this is scored

The daily running of the yard: tasks and feeding rounds, shift and holiday planning, time recording for employees and mini-jobbers, help from boarders (Stalldienst), and reminders — and, where staff are clocked in by location, how that is done and documented.

0 — No staff or task features; the day is organised by phone and paper.

3 — A shared to-do list or chat, with no assignment, no recurrence and no record of who did what.

5 — Recurring tasks and rounds assigned to people with completion ticked on the phone, a shift plan, and reminders for due work.

8 — Time recording for employees that meets the minimum-wage and working-time documentation duties, holiday and absence planning, boarder duty rotas for self-care stables, completion history per task, and any location-based clock-in documented as opt-in with its purpose stated.

10 — Operations run and are evidenced in the system: rotas, time records and absences exported to payroll, permissions per role (owner, manager, groom, boarder), offline use in a barn without signal, and an audit trail answering who fed, medicated or turned out which horse when.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

The only operations facts I can hang anything on: presence on the yard can be verified through a manual, purpose-stated location release with no stored GPS data, and staff are named as users who maintain the horse records. We found no public information on recurring tasks and feeding rounds, shift and holiday planning, boarder duty rotas, or time recording for employees and mini-jobbers. 3 2

Report an error

Boarder portal & communication

How this is scored

What the horse owner sees and does: their horse's records and the services billed to them, instructions to the stable, bookings, news from the yard — and how their personal data and their horse's data are scoped, so each owner sees their own horse and nothing else.

0 — No owner access; everything goes by WhatsApp, phone or a notice board.

3 — A group chat or news feed for the whole yard, with no per-owner view of their own horse or bill.

5 — Owner login showing their own horse's released records, logged services and invoices, with a way to send instructions or requests to the stable.

8 — Owners, co-owners and Reitbeteiligungen scoped separately with the stable deciding what is released, push notifications for due dates and charges, bookings and requests with status, and the privacy policy naming how owner data is processed.

10 — The portal replaces the phone calls: every record and charge an owner is entitled to see available on demand, instructions acknowledged by the staff member who reads them, owner data exportable and deletable on request, and roles that keep one boarder's data out of another's view by design.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

Boarders are clearly app users — they help maintain their horse's information, the platform's stated purpose includes booking extra services, they receive email and push notifications about appointments and emergencies, and they can object to photos of their horse being published. But we found no public information on whether an owner sees only their own horse's records and charges, on co-owners and riding shares being scoped separately, or on instructions being acknowledged by the staff member who reads them. 2 3

Report an error

Facilities, lessons & events

How this is scored

The yard's shared resources and teaching business: arena and indoor school bookings, horse walker, treadmill and solarium use, lessons and school horses, courses and clinics with registration and payment, guest boxes.

0 — No booking or lesson features.

3 — A shared calendar where anyone can type an entry, with no rules, no capacity and no link to billing.

5 — Arena and equipment booking with time slots and rules, lessons scheduled with riders and school horses, and courses with online registration.

8 — Bookings with capacity, closures and booking rules per user group, equipment use linked to billing or credit, lesson cards or subscriptions, school-horse workload tracked, and events with participant management and payment.

10 — The facility runs on the system: device integration (NFC, gates, walker or solarium controllers) recording use automatically, external riders and guests bookable with their own terms, lesson and course revenue flowing into the same accounts as board, and utilisation reported per facility.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

Local stable functions are described — gate opening and activating the horse walker or solarium via the phone's location — which points at equipment tied to presence on the yard. We found no public information on arena or equipment booking with time slots and rules, lessons with riders and school horses, or courses and events with registration and payment. 3 2

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where boarder, staff and horse data are hosted, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, push notifications, payments, email). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; a phone app also sends data through the app-store and push providers, so the chain counts, not only the server.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no privacy policy that covers the app.

3 — A privacy policy exists, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the processors behind the app (analytics, push, payment) are not named.

5 — EU hosting stated and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain (push notifications, analytics, email, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with locations, a data processing agreement offered to the stable for boarder and staff data, and location tracking of staff described with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, data export and deletion documented, and a security or certification statement published rather than implied.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

A privacy policy covers the app, names the OpenStreetMap Nominatim service for the radius search and states that only postcode and country are sent to it, and lists vets in emergencies, billing service providers and the hosting provider as recipient categories. But we found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, or the named processors behind push notifications, payments and email, so I cannot tell where my boarders', staff and horses' data actually sit. 3

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a stable owner can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per stable, box, horse or module, which modules (billing, staff, portal, devices) cost extra, setup fees, minimum term, and what happens to the data on cancellation.

0 — No public prices at all; every stable is a sales call.

3 — A starting price or "from" figure exists, but what is included and how it scales with horses or modules is unclear.

5 — Prices per tier or module are public with the main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (billing, device integration, extra users, setup) is unpriced or "on request".

8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with its scaling rule (per box, horse or user), setup fees and add-ons listed, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.

10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given yard size and module set, with every add-on, setup, hardware and support cost and the cancellation and data-return terms published.

Report an error

The Boarding-Stable Owner

Across the captured legal pages there is no price, tier, per-box, per-horse or module figure anywhere — nothing a stable owner could compute a year's cost from. We found no public information on setup fees, minimum term, or what happens to the data on cancellation, so every yard would start from a sales conversation. 1 2

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 — uncited Report an error

Questions about DigiStable

Is DigiStable European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies DigiStable as EU-Made.

Where does DigiStable store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 16 Oct 2026.

Does DigiStable have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 16 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to DigiStable?

As of 16 Oct 2026, the panel rates horsemanager+ (3/5), Equimondo (2.5/5) and LIVERYLive (2.5/5) highest among the other 12 Stable & Equestrian Management 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 horsemanager+ (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: DigiStable 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 DigiStable? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (3)

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

  1. 1 Legal notice www.digistable.de Checked 16 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Terms of service www.digistable.de Checked 16 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.digistable.de Checked 16 Oct 2026 Details →