whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Video Conferencing

Zoom

Rest of world 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 Zoom Communications, Inc. · zoom.us

Compare with Microsoft Teams → 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 Educator

Weighted verdict

Teaches thirty people who join from whatever they have, half of them on a phone in a dead spot. Cares that the browser works without an install, that guests need no account, that breakout rooms are usable, and that nobody is excluded by bandwidth or by a missing caption.

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

Scored by The Educator

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 Educator

Breakout rooms are documented in real depth — five distinct roles, pre-assignment, broadcast into rooms, help requests, timed close — and capacity is published per plan, from 100 participants up to a 5,000-participant add-on, with webinars at 500 and RTMP live streaming and live transcription in the browser. What holds it back for a class where half the room is on a phone: I found no public information on adaptive quality or behaviour on a weak connection, and none on per-participant moderation, layout control, or diagnostics after a bad call. 2 6 10

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 Educator

Transport security is concrete — TLS 1.2 with 256-bit AES-GCM — and admission is thought through: passcode, waiting room and authenticated-only joining, with the waiting room auto-enabled when no other security option is set and the requirement locked for smaller account types. The captured browser pages show end-to-end encryption as not supported in any listed browser, and I found no public information on encryption at rest, key handling, or a plain statement of what the vendor can see in meeting media. 3 7 9 10

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 Educator

The no-install story is the strong half: browser joining carries the same features as the web client, Chromebooks and Windows tablets behave like desktops, mobile browsers follow the supported OS versions, and live transcription and translation are ticked for every browser — nobody misses a caption. For the people on a phone in a dead spot, though, I found no public information on dial-in, on behaviour at low bandwidth, on guests joining without an account, or on any accessibility statement or screen-reader testing. 9 10

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 Educator

Recording is host-controlled, a notification is promised when it starts, sessions can be set to delete automatically after a specified number of days, and Bring Your Own Storage can keep the files in your own bucket instead of the vendor's — the first two things a works council asks about are at least present. We found no public information on where vendor-stored recordings are kept, on encryption at rest for them, on who accessed them, or on a separate retention rule for transcripts. 4 11 12

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 Educator

The developer surface is real and well documented: meeting scheduling APIs, calendar APIs with an OpenAPI download and Postman collection, recording and transcript webhooks, and embeddable SDKs for web and mobile, with SSO and managed domains arriving on the Business plan. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, hardware room-system support, or any self-hosted or private-cloud deployment, and the recording webhooks are noted as limited to universal credit accounts. 2 7 11 14

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 Educator

The contracting entity is Zoom Communications, Inc. of San Jose, California, with the Federal Trade Commission named as the enforcer of its Data Privacy Framework commitments; nothing in the captured pages confirms EU residency for media or storage, and we found no public information naming the third-party service providers that carry the traffic. Standard contractual clauses, DPF certifications and an EU representative in Cork paper the transfers, but an EU representative is not EU hosting, and for a buyer who weighs this heavily that decides it. 3 4

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 Educator

Per-host prices are public with billing period and VAT treatment stated — "€13.33 /user per month · billed annually‡· excludes VAT" on Pro, €17.49 on Business — alongside capacity limits and 10 GB cloud storage per user, and a large-meeting add-on "From €46.50 for 500 participants per month". I still could not compute a full annual invoice: dial-in rates, the cloud-recording storage plan and the separate charges for AI summaries and extra recording file options are not quantified on the captured pages. 2 4 11

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 ⚠ 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.

Sources (14)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage zoom.us Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing zoom.us Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy explore.zoom.us Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Terms of service www.zoom.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 The meeting itself — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 The meeting itself — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap developers.zoom.us Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →