whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Video Conferencing

Wire

EU-Made 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 Wire Swiss GmbH · wire.com

Compare with Google Meet → 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 Security Officer

Weighted verdict

Wants to know what the vendor can see, and reads "encrypted" as a question rather than an answer. Asks which meetings get end-to-end encryption, what stops working when they do, who holds the keys, and who can walk into a meeting with a link.

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

Scored by The Security Officer

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 Security Officer

Instant meetings with a published limit of 150 video conference participants on the paid tier are what the captured pages show of the call itself. I found no public information on screen sharing, breakout rooms, host moderation such as mute-all, or how the call behaves on a constrained connection — I have to score the silence. 1 2

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 Security Officer

This is the case I usually have to dig for: text, voice, video and files are end-to-end encrypted by default under MLS, with the vendor stating plainly it has no access to encryption keys and no backdoors, and the server only ever seeing encrypted data. The cryptography is open source on GitHub and independently audited, forward secrecy and post-compromise security are named, device fingerprints can be verified with new-device notification, ID-Shield ties users to your identity provider, and guest links are password-protected and admin-restrictable. Key handling is explained down to the TreeKEM mechanism, so I have little left to ask. 2 3 4 7 9

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 Security Officer

Guests can join by password-protected link without an account, and one account syncs across up to 8 devices — that is the whole of the reach story on these pages. I found no public information on browser joining without an install, telephone dial-in, live captions, keyboard or screen-reader operation, or behaviour on a poor mobile connection. 2 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 Security Officer

I found no public information on meeting recording itself — not who may record, not whether participants are told, not where a recording would sit or how long it would live. What the pages do document is retention hygiene around everything else: encrypted messages deleted after delivery, logs kept at most 90 days, usage data deleted after 365 days, servers in Germany and Ireland, self-deleting messages, and an admin console that can restrict file sharing and guest links. 2 3 4

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 Security Officer

Deployment is genuinely the customer's choice: on-premises is offered with every feature MLS-protected across cloud and on-premises alike, SAML SSO and SCIM sit in the admin console, an open-source SDK on JVM with TypeScript on the way supports webhooks and in-channel apps, and federation plus ID-Shield bind identity to your own provider. The gap I cannot overlook is the calendar and the meeting room: I found no public information on any calendar integration or room-system support, so the scheduling layer of the stack is invisible here. 1 2 7 8 9

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 Security Officer

Media and data sit in Germany and Ireland, the hosting subprocessor is named as AWS in the EU, ISO 27001 and 27701 are published, a complete subprocessor list with locations is public, transfer safeguards are stated, and the on-premises option removes the hosting question entirely. What holds this back: the contracting entity is Wire Swiss GmbH in Zug, Switzerland — Wire Germany GmbH appears only as an Article 27 GDPR representative — and payment processing runs through Stripe in the USA, named as a non-EU location in the published list. 1 3 4 5 6

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 Security Officer

The per-person prices are public with the billing period stated: €7.45 per person/month on annual payment or €8.94 per person/month on monthly payment for teams up to 100 people, with video conferences up to 150 participants and a free tier up to 5. Above 100 people every tier is 'Custom', and I found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, or what the optional support levels cost, so a larger buyer cannot compute an invoice from these pages. 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 3 Report an error
Subprocessors US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified 0/2 pts 4 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 Wire? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (9)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage wire.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing wire.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Security page wire.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Privacy policy wire.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Imprint wire.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap wire.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap wire.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap wire.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap wire.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →