whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Translation & Localization

DeepL Pro & API

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 DeepL SE · www.deepl.com

Compare with Google Cloud Translation → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

DeepL Pro & API: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai DeepL Pro & API: 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.

DeepL Pro & API at a glance

Vendor
DeepL SE
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates DeepL Pro & API 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. DeepL Pro & API is DeepL SE's own neural translation engine, sold as translator seats and a metered API. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources

DeepL Pro & API alternatives, European ones first →

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

The In-House Document Translator

Weighted verdict

Works in the legal and export team of a machine builder in Baden-Württemberg with customers in France, Italy, Poland and China. Translates contracts, operating manuals and supplier correspondence every day, with no translation management system and no wish for one. Needs translations that read like the company wrote them, the company's terms kept through a glossary, Word and PDF files back with their layout intact, and a written promise that a draft contract is not kept or used to train anything.

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

Scored by The In-House Document Translator

Panel median The In-House Document Translator 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 In-House Document Translator
Machine translation & AI quality 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Translation memory, terminology & review workflow 2 of 5 2 of 5
Integrations, file formats & developer tools 3 of 5 3 of 5
Confidentiality of translated content 4 of 5 4 of 5
Data export, portability & self-hosting 2.5 of 5 3 of 5
European sovereignty 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Pricing transparency 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5

Machine translation & AI quality

How this is scored

What the machine translation does and how well it is controlled: the languages and language pairs covered, the engine (own neural or LLM model, or a choice of third-party engines such as DeepL, Google, Microsoft or an LLM), glossaries and formality applied during translation, document translation that keeps the layout (Word, PowerPoint, PDF, InDesign), custom or adaptive models trained on the customer's own translations, automatic quality estimation or scoring, and published evaluations of translation quality.

0 — No machine translation of any kind, and no way to connect an engine.

3 — Machine translation is offered or one engine can be connected; languages, glossary use and quality controls are basic or not described.

5 — Machine translation for the major European and world languages with the list published, glossaries applied during translation, a formality or tone setting, document translation that keeps formatting for common office formats, and either an own engine or a choice of several named engines.

8 — Custom or adaptive models that learn from the customer's translation memory or corrections, automatic quality estimation per segment with a threshold that routes weak segments to human review, LLM-based translation with style guides and context, engine selection per language pair stated, and a published quality evaluation with its method.

10 — Translation quality that an organisation can measure and steer: evaluations against named benchmarks or blind human review published with their method, quality estimation calibrated and explained, custom models with their training data and isolation documented, and every machine-translated segment traceable to the engine, model version and glossary that produced it.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

This is close to the whole answer for my contracts and manuals: an own engine with a published list of 126 languages and per-language features, glossaries that enforce house terminology with grammatical adaptation and do-not-translate terms, a formal/informal setting, and file translation that keeps the layout of Word, PowerPoint and PDF — scanned PDFs included — plus InDesign, images and Excel. What holds it back: I found no public information on automatic quality estimation that would route weak segments to review, and the blind-test quality claim comes without a published method. 2 3 4 9 11 12

Report an error

Translation memory, terminology & review workflow

How this is scored

How translation is managed as an ongoing process: translation memory with fuzzy matches, a termbase or glossary managed centrally, style guides, review and approval stages, automated QA checks (placeholders, tags, length, terminology, punctuation), an in-context or visual editor, screenshots and context for translators, tasks and deadlines, roles per language, and ordering or inviting human translators and agencies inside the product.

0 — No management of translations at all; text goes in and comes out with nothing stored or reviewed.

3 — Translations can be edited or a glossary kept; translation memory, review stages and QA checks are basic or not described.

5 — A translation memory reused across projects, a central glossary, at least one review or approval stage, automated QA checks for placeholders and terminology, comments and screenshots for context, and roles that limit translators to their languages.

8 — Configurable multi-step workflows with automation rules, an in-context or visual editor for apps or websites, QA checks configurable per project with blocking rules, style guides applied by the AI, translation memory and termbase shared across projects with penalties and priorities, vendor or agency management with ordering inside the product, and progress and cost reporting per language.

10 — A translation process an enterprise runs on: workflows per content type with conditional routing on quality scores, linguistic quality assessment with a named framework (MQM or similar), termbase with approval workflow and forbidden terms, full revision history per segment, and productivity and quality metrics per translator and vendor.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

As an engine rather than a managed process it does what I want without forcing a TMS on me: a translation memory uploaded as TMX, shared with the team and reused for similar texts, a glossary manager with shared glossaries, merging and priority order, plus team administration and a claimed workflow feature. I found no public information on review or approval stages, automated checks on placeholders or terminology, or inviting translators and agencies, so it stays low on a scale built around review workflow. 1 2 4 11 13 14

Report an error

Integrations, file formats & developer tools

How this is scored

How content gets in and out: the file formats supported (XLIFF, PO, JSON, YAML, Android XML, iOS strings and xcstrings, Office documents, InDesign), a REST API and CLI, SDKs and over-the-air updates for apps, Git repository sync (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket) and CI pipelines, connectors for CMS, shop and design tools (WordPress, Contentful, Shopify, Figma), browser and office add-ins, webhooks, and a JavaScript snippet or proxy for website translation.

0 — No documented way to get content in or out except typing or pasting by hand.

3 — File upload and download or a basic API; formats, repository sync and connectors are basic or not described.

5 — A documented REST API, a list of supported file formats covering the common software and document formats, sync with at least one Git host or CI, and connectors or plugins for several named CMS, shop or design tools.

8 — A CLI and SDKs for named platforms, over-the-air updates for mobile or web apps, Git sync with branching, webhooks, connectors for the main CMS, shop, design and support tools, office or browser add-ins, a public status page, and API limits documented.

10 — Integration that scales across an organisation: an API covering every function of the product with versioning and SDKs, an app or connector framework third parties build on, continuous localization in CI with pull requests opened automatically, and every connector documented with its limits and the fields it syncs.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

Files in and out is my world: PDF, Word, PowerPoint, Excel, HTML, TXT, SRT, JPG, PNG and InDesign with formatting preserved, Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace add-ins, Chrome, Edge and Firefox extensions, Google Drive, SharePoint, Zendesk and Adobe Experience Manager connectors, and a documented REST API — including translation-memory import and export endpoints with their limits spelled out. I found no public information on a CLI, SDKs, Git synchronisation, CI pipelines or webhooks, which a software team would miss more than I would. 3 5 9 11 15 16 19 20

Report an error

Confidentiality of translated content

How this is scored

What happens to the text a customer translates: whether source and target texts are stored and for how long, deletion after translation, whether customer content is used to train the vendor's or a third party's models, which machine translation and LLM providers a TMS sends text to and whether that can be restricted or switched off, encryption in transit and at rest, single sign-on, roles and audit logs, and certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) with their scope. Where the text is processed is scored under sovereignty.

0 — Customer texts are stored indefinitely and used for the vendor's own purposes, or no statement on data handling exists at all.

3 — The product is described as secure or GDPR-compliant and a privacy policy exists; retention of translated texts, model training and third-party engines are basic or not described.

5 — A documented statement that customer texts are not used to train models, retention or deletion of translated texts stated, the third-party engines or LLM providers named, encryption in transit and at rest, single sign-on on a business tier, and a data processing agreement offered.

8 — Texts deleted immediately after translation or after a retention period the customer sets, third-party AI processing switchable per project or account, zero-retention terms with the named LLM providers, audit logs, granular roles, ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certification stated with its scope, and a private or dedicated deployment option.

10 — Confidentiality that can be verified: an on-premise or customer-controlled deployment, customer-managed encryption keys, every subprocessor that sees content listed with its role, independent audit reports available, and every data flow of a translation request documented end to end.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

The written promise I need before a draft contract leaves the building is on their pages: for Pro subscribers texts are stored only as technically needed and deleted afterward, never used to train their models, with a stated 72-hour debugging exception and deletion 90 days after contract end where storage was requested. Add TLS encryption, bring your own key, SSO with OIDC and SAML, MFA, audit logs, role-based permissions, ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II with its scope named, a BSI C5 attestation and a downloadable data processing agreement; I found no public information on a dedicated deployment, and the free developer API reserves perpetual storage, which I would simply not use for contracts. 1 4 7 9 10 17 18

Report an error

Data export, portability & self-hosting

How this is scored

Whether translation assets stay the customer's and can leave with them: export of translation memory and termbase in open formats (TMX, TBX, XLIFF, CSV), export of all projects and files, import from another TMS, an API that can read every asset, the return or deletion of data on termination, open-source code and a self-hosted or on-premise edition.

0 — Translations cannot be exported; they exist only in the vendor's interface or engine.

3 — Translated files can be downloaded; export of translation memory and glossary, import and termination terms are basic or not described.

5 — Translation memory exportable as TMX and glossary as TBX or CSV, all project files downloadable, import of translation memory and glossaries from another tool, and an API that reads translations and keys.

8 — Complete export of every asset (memory, termbase, files, comments, history) in open formats, a documented migration path from named competitors, the data returned or deleted on termination under stated terms, and a self-hosted or on-premise edition with its own documentation.

10 — The customer owns the assets end to end: open-source code under a named licence that runs fully self-hosted with feature parity stated, a complete export another tool can import without loss, and the deletion of every copy on termination documented.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

My memory can leave as a TMX export through the API and come back the same way, translated documents come back as files, stored content is deleted 90 days after the agreement ends, and the account can be deleted in the settings. I found no public information on exporting glossaries in TBX or CSV, on a documented migration path from another tool, or on a self-hosted edition, so the exit is solid but not complete. 9 10 19 20

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where texts are translated, stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, machine translation engines, LLM providers, CDN for over-the-air delivery, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; translated texts often hold personal data and trade secrets, so the whole chain counts, including the engines a TMS calls. A self-hosted edition the customer runs on its own European servers counts as the customer's chain, whatever the vendor's seat.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.

3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.

5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (machine translation or LLM providers, CDN, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations including the engines and LLM providers, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated — or a self-hosted edition documented that keeps every text on the customer's own servers.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting, engine and every subprocessor, or a self-hosted open-source edition with no call home, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

DeepL SE is registered in Cologne, the privacy policy states that translation runs exclusively on DeepL's own infrastructure in the EEA, the data protection officer sits in Germany, and ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II and BSI C5 are attested alongside a published data processing agreement. The captured pages give different indications on processing location — the licence terms also permit third-party cloud infrastructure with DeepL determining the location — and named subprocessors include US firms such as Apryse for the PDF SDK and Cloudflare, so I stop just short of full marks. 8 9 10 11 17

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per tier by characters, words, keys, hosted words or seats, what happens when the volume exceeds the tier, the number of users, projects and languages included, which features (machine translation volume, AI credits, SSO, integrations, API access) cost extra, the free tier and its limits, the self-hosted edition and its support, minimum term and setup.

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

3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with volume, seats or features is unclear.

5 — Tiers are public with their price per volume band and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (overage, extra seats, machine translation or AI volume, SSO, connectors) is unpriced or "on request".

8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (characters, words, keys, seats), overage handling stated, add-ons and AI credits priced, the self-hosted edition's cost or licence stated, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.

10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given volume, seat count and feature set, with every add-on, setup, support and overage fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.

Report an error

The In-House Document Translator

I can compute my yearly cost from public pages alone: Individual at €7.49 per user per month billed annually through Business at €49.99, with per-seat limits on characters, file translations and glossaries spelled out, the Write Pro add-on at €6.99 per user per month, API usage at €22.00 per extra million characters with included volumes published, 20% off annual billing, and VAT treatment stated. Enterprise is custom-priced on request and the fair usage policy behind the unlimited characters is not quantified, which is what keeps it from the top. 1 10 16 18

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 6 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.

Hosting location Not determined — uncited Report an error
Hosting options Not determined — uncited Report an error
Open source Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data processing agreement Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about DeepL Pro & API

Is DeepL Pro & API European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies DeepL Pro & API as EU-Made.

Where does DeepL Pro & API store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.

Does DeepL Pro & API have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to DeepL Pro & API?

As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates SimpleLocalize (3.5/5), LILT (3.5/5) and Phrase Localization Platform (3.5/5) highest among the other 12 Translation & Localization 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 SimpleLocalize (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: DeepL Pro & API 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 DeepL Pro & API? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (20)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage (with pricing) www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Features page www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Features page (document translation) www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Features page (glossary) www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Integrations page www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 API documentation developers.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Security / trust page (data security) www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Legal notice www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Privacy policy www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Terms of service (with data processing terms) www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Machine translation & AI quality — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Machine translation & AI quality — found from sitemap developers.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Translation memory, terminology & review workflow — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Translation memory, terminology & review workflow — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Integrations, file formats & developer tools — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Integrations, file formats & developer tools — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  17. 17 Confidentiality of translated content — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  18. 18 Confidentiality of translated content — found from sitemap www.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  19. 19 Data export, portability & self-hosting — found from sitemap developers.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  20. 20 Data export, portability & self-hosting — found from sitemap developers.deepl.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →