I know there are a dozen of different "EU Alternatives" websites/catalogs already and some of them are actually great for discovering European brands and software. But they never show you what's inside: you only get a name, a logo, a few lines long pitch and then you're on your own.
So after doing some due diligence I've built a more detailed one. Whether you just want a European Dropbox/Google Analytics/1Password etc or you need to know your customers' data won't leave the EU, the idea is the same: give you what you need after the name, not just the name.
Two features I have that surface-level lists do not:
- I show the exposure, not just the "European" label. That word hides the part that matters. A company can have a Berlin office, a "hosted in the EU" banner, and still route your data through a US analytics provider or sit on US-owned cloud - at which point US law reaches it regardless of where the rack is. So for every listing I check, and link the source for:
- Where the data is actually hosted - the data-centre region, not the HQ on the about page.
- The sub-processor list - the one nobody reads. Pretty EU hosting page up front, US tooling quietly in the DPA annex.
- CLOUD Act exposure - US parent or US hyperscaler storage means US jurisdiction, full stop.
- Who owns the company - "EU-founded, US-funded" is a different animal from "EU-owned". Ownership and hosting are shown as separate signals so you decide which one you care about.
- A proper feature matrix. Not "here are five alternatives, good luck" - an actual side-by-side, so you can see which tool genuinely replaces the US one feature-for-feature and which is wishful thinking.
Everything is from public sources only - the vendor's own DPA, sub-processors page, the company registry, legal notice etc. Each point has a link to original page and last verification date. Vendor's self-attestation is not taken on faith.
One number that fell out of doing this for more than 200 tools: a little more than 30% are completely clear of US Cloud Act exposure with no US parent and no significat sub-processors.
On money: the site earns nothing right now. There are a couple of affiliate links added already and it's disclosed everywhere they appear plus listed in full on the transparency page. That's the whole monetisation plan: affiliate links, nothing hidden. Listing order is editorial - no commission logic anywhere in how stuff is sorted.
What I would be happy to hear from you: what's missing? Did I get any assessments wrong? If you see something - let me know and I will fix it right away.
Disclaimer: I'm affiliated. I built and run this site. It currently has a couple of affiliate links live; how it's funded is documented in full at https://euvetted.com/transparency
Ha, fair and I won't pretend otherwise. The write-ups are AI-drafted. I'm one person covering everything and there is no real option to do it otherwise.
But the line I care about is this. The prose is AI, the facts aren't. Everything you see like ownership, cloud act exposure, hosting region, sub-processors, feature comparisons is verified manually.
And you are right that the tone needs to be fixed.
Why didn't you disclose your use of AI in the first place?
I disclosed monetisation at first place because that can actually bias what I recommend. On the other hand AI just helps me with drafting big texts and content, it does not make any decisions so in my head it looked like just another tool I've used during the development and I haven't really thought it's worth disclosing it.
Fair point though, I'll keep that in mind next time.
Do you need to use AI for the replies, too, though?
Not at all sir