whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Video Conferencing

Whereby

UK / wider Europe Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

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

by Whereby AS · whereby.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 IT Administrator

Weighted verdict

Gets the call when the board meeting will not start. Wants capacity published rather than promised, room systems that work, SSO, and diagnostics after a bad call. Judges a product by its worst meeting, not its demo.

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

Scored by The IT Administrator

The meeting itself

How this is scored

Whether the call works: participant capacity, video and audio quality under load, screen sharing, breakout rooms, moderation, and what happens on a bad connection.

0 — Small meetings only, no screen sharing worth the name, no moderation controls, and the call degrades without telling anyone.

3 — Standard meetings with screen sharing and mute-all, but low participant limits, no breakout rooms and no bandwidth adaptation stated.

5 — Meetings at the scale most teams need with screen sharing, breakout rooms, host moderation, and documented behaviour on constrained connections.

8 — Large meetings and webinars with published capacity limits, per-participant moderation and waiting rooms, layout control, simulcast or adaptive bitrate stated, and reliable behaviour on mobile networks.

10 — Scale and control are engineering claims the vendor stands behind: capacity published per plan and per region, selective forwarding with adaptive quality documented, live streaming, hardware-room support, and diagnostics an admin can read after a bad call.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

Screen sharing, chat, whiteboard and transcription are confirmed, so the standard meeting works, and there's a real Group call vs Small meeting mode distinction. But participant capacity is published nowhere, there are no breakout rooms, no moderator controls in evidence, and "our infrastructure is scalable... including in low bandwidth scenarios" is a promise, not a number — and there is no diagnostics story for after a bad call. 1 2 3

Report an error

Encryption & meeting access

How this is scored

What is actually encrypted and against whom, plus who can get into a meeting. Judged on documented mechanism rather than on the word "encrypted".

0 — Transport encryption only, undocumented; meetings joinable by anyone with a link and no lobby.

3 — TLS in transit and encryption at rest, with the vendor holding all keys; access control is a passcode.

5 — The above plus a lobby or waiting room, host-controlled admission, per-meeting passcodes, and a clear statement that the vendor can technically access media.

8 — Optional end-to-end encryption for meetings with the trade-offs named (which features stop working), documented key handling, SSO-gated joining, and per-meeting access policies.

10 — End-to-end encryption available without surrendering the product — its cryptography documented or open source, key management explained, identity verification for participants, and the vendor stating plainly what it can and cannot see.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

Optional end-to-end encryption exists with a named mechanism — DTLS-SRTP, client-generated keys — and the trade-offs stated outright, which beats vendor-held keys. It falls short of the top anchors because E2EE is opt-in while Group call is the default, and the access half of the criterion is a blank: no lobby, no passcode policy, no SSO-gated joining, no per-meeting access controls anywhere on the evidence. 3

Report an error

Reach & accessibility

How this is scored

Whether everyone who needs to join can: browser without an install, dial-in, low bandwidth, guests without accounts, captions and keyboard operation.

0 — A desktop client is the only way in; guests must create an account.

3 — Browser joining exists but is degraded, guests can join by link, and there is no dial-in and no accessibility statement.

5 — Full-feature browser joining without an install, guest access by link, mobile apps, and a stated accessibility posture.

8 — Telephone dial-in with numbers listed, live captions, keyboard-navigable and screen-reader-tested interface, and documented low-bandwidth behaviour.

10 — Reach is designed for: browser parity with the client, dial-in across the regions the customer operates in, live captions and translation, a published accessibility conformance report, and a usable experience on a poor mobile connection.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

Mobile devices and low-bandwidth performance are claimed and permanent room links plus a browser-first product mean guests can presumably join without an account. But there is no telephone dial-in at all — no fallback when the network dies — transcription is not live captions, and the evidence says nothing about keyboard navigation, screen readers, or any accessibility posture. 1 3

Report an error

Recordings, retention & admin control

How this is scored

A recording is personal data about everyone in the room. Who may record, who is told, where it is stored, how long it lives, and what the works council can switch off.

0 — Anyone can record, storage location unstated, no retention rule, no admin policy.

3 — Host-only recording with a notification, but storage region unstated, retention manual, and no organisation-wide policy control.

5 — Admin policy over who may record, participant notification and consent prompt, stated storage region, and manual deletion that works.

8 — Automatic retention and deletion per policy, recordings encrypted at rest with access logged, transcription handled with its own retention rule, and attendance or analytics features that can be switched off for co-determination.

10 — Built for a works agreement: every recording, transcript and analytics feature independently switchable and documented, retention executed and evidenced, an audit trail of who accessed which recording, and no participant-level behavioural scoring at all.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

Recording exists but the vendor offloads consent entirely to the customer — "they are then responsible for collecting consents from all participants" — with no built-in notification or consent prompt in evidence, no storage region for recordings, no retention rule, and no organisation-wide admin policy. 3

Report an error

Integrations & deployment

How this is scored

Calendar, identity and the wider stack — plus, in this category, whether the product can be run on the customer's own infrastructure at all.

0 — No calendar integration, no SSO, no API; cloud-only with no alternative.

3 — One calendar integration and basic SSO, no API worth building on, cloud-only.

5 — Calendar integration for the major suites, SAML or OIDC SSO, a documented API for scheduling, and room-system support.

8 — The above plus SCIM provisioning, embedding via SDK, webhooks for meeting events, and either a self-hosted option or a documented private-cloud deployment.

10 — Deployment is the customer's choice: a genuine on-premises or private-cloud option with the same features, open protocols or open source, embeddable SDKs, and identity integration that does not require the vendor's directory.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

The Embedded product is a genuine API/SDK story — programmatic room creation, developer tooling, transcription via API — plus in-room apps like Miro and Trello. But on the Meetings side I see no calendar integration, no SSO/SAML/OIDC, no SCIM, no webhooks, no room-system support and no self-hosted option — cloud-only — and the FAQ even has to ask whether the API is reachable on a Meetings plan. 1 2 3

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where media and metadata are processed, who the contracting entity is, which subprocessors carry the traffic. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it — which in this category is heavily.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, media routed through unstated regions, subprocessors unnamed.

3 — EU data residency for storage while media relays or metadata remain non-EU, or the contracting entity sits outside the EU.

5 — EU hosting and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — relays, analytics, support tooling, transcription — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.

8 — Media and metadata processed in the EU on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, complete subprocessor list published, any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: media never leaves the EU, every subprocessor European, certification published, and an on-premises option that removes the question entirely.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

Account information is hosted in Ireland, but Usage information is hosted in Ireland and the United States under SCCs, offices span Norway, the UK and the US, media relay routing is unstated, and subprocessors appear only as categories with not one named provider. A Norwegian entity and ISO 27001 help, but "European owned and privacy-first" is marketing until the chain is named and the US piece of the metadata flow is explained with more than a boilerplate clause. 1 3

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the annual invoice for their host count — including the capacity, dial-in and recording storage they actually need — from public pages alone.

0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.

3 — A per-host headline exists, but participant caps, dial-in minutes or recording storage are unpriced or unmentioned.

5 — Per-host prices public with billing period stated and capacity limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (webinar capacity, dial-in, storage) sits in an unpriced add-on.

8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with per-host maths, capacity limits, dial-in rates, storage allowances, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.

10 — Complete price computability: a calculator producing the annual invoice for a given host count, meeting size and recording volume, including overage and per-region dial-in.

Report an error

The IT Administrator

A public pricing page demonstrably exists with two products, per-user licensing for Meetings and usage-based billing for Embedded, and a comparison table — so it's not a pure sales conversation. But no per-host price, no capacity limits, no storage allowances, no minimum term and no VAT treatment made it into the evidence, so I cannot compute an annual invoice for a given host count from public pages as captured. 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

2 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 4 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 Whereby? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (14)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage whereby.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing whereby.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy whereby.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Security / trust page whereby.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 The meeting itself — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 The meeting itself — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap docs.whereby.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →