envivo.io
German digital sales room and buyer engagement platform. Sellers assemble branded microsites carrying proposals, documents, video and live chat, track how each recipient interacts with them, and work an AI engagement score that predicts close probability and prompts timed follow ups. A content library, approvals and version control, e-signature and a payment function sit alongside. Sold self serve from 19 euro per month with a five user minimum, plus a quote only enterprise tier.
Capability Axes
Capability grades
17 of 17 axes rated · 5 graded A or B
The marketed AI is a Customer Engagement Score that predicts the probability of a deal closing and suggests timed follow ups. Remove it and a complete digital sales room remains: branded microsites, a content library, live chat, behavioural tracking, notifications, approvals and version control, e-signature and a payment function. Same removal test result already recorded for the established platforms in this index.
Automation is marketed as set once, then hands off. Each process is configured once for the business and everything after that runs by itself, dispatching content, scheduled activities and reminders by email or text message, with chatbots covering the chat surface outside service hours. No approval gate, review step, escalation route or action log is described anywhere in the public surface.
The engagement score is described only by what it emits, a close probability and a suggested next action. No model, provider, family, version, input set, accuracy figure or fallback behaviour is published, so nothing explains how a score is reached for a deal the seller is being told to prioritise.
Three linked customer cases carry figures: Vodafone at 46 percent shorter sales cycle and 37 percent higher close rate on its business shop channel, Allianz at 52 percent reduced administration, EK Immobilien on buying experience. A logo wall adds Siemens, Nokia, Atos, Holiday Inn, Best Western, H-Hotels and Rocco Forte.
Held at B rather than A because no measurement basis, named individual or reporting period accompanies any figure, and because one case presents 100 percent secure and compliant as though it were a percentage improvement, which puts the whole number set in question.
The platform pushes reminders to prospects by email and text message and nothing addresses the customer's obligations when it does: no consent standard, no unsubscribe mechanic, no reference to the German unfair competition rules that govern business email marketing, and no telecoms consent position for the messaging channel. Exposure is lower than a cold outbound tool because the recipient is an already engaged prospect, which is what holds this at C rather than below it.
The published policy is a properly structured German one: a legal basis cited per processing activity, rights enumerated, a supervisory authority route, a storage duration principle, and named processors each with a stated data processing agreement. Two defects hold it here. It is scoped to the marketing website and says nothing about the platform where prospect behaviour, chat transcripts and signed contracts live.
And it names a different legal entity as controller, envivo.select GmbH at Marktplatz 25 with an envivo-select.com mailbox, than the site notice names as operator, envivo.io GmbH at Adalbert-Stifterweg 30 under commercial register 169485 in Munich, so a buyer cannot tell which company would be their counterparty. Last modified August 2022, which also puts it ahead of the current transfer framework.
No third party data is acquired, licensed or resold. The corpus is the customer's own content plus first party interaction telemetry on the customer's own prospects, the low exposure shape already graded at B elsewhere in this index. The one place data is generated about a person who never contacted the seller is the stakeholder identification feature, which surfaces people reached by forwarding, and no basis is stated for it.
Sending runs on the vendor's own infrastructure and integration is by interface into CRM and ERP systems rather than by browser extension or scraping, so the standing exposures in this category do not apply. The named channel connector for WhatsApp is the one open edge: business initiated messaging on that platform carries template and opt in constraints, and no method or account model is stated.
The training question is unanswered in every direction. Nothing states whether customer content or prospect interaction data feeds the engagement score across accounts, no tenant boundary is described, and no retention or deletion terms exist for platform data, because the only privacy document published covers the marketing website.
Nothing impersonates a person and the microsite is openly branded by the seller, so a recipient knows whose page they are on. What they are not told is the depth: opens, views, dwell, comments, forwards and signature events are reported back, a score is computed on their behaviour, and forwarding surfaces them as a newly identified stakeholder.
Chatbots are marketed to cover the chat outside service hours with no disclosure position stated, and for a company established in Germany and selling into the European market, the absence of any Article 50 position is the sharpest gap on this axis.
An API appears in every pricing tier alongside interface integration to CRM and ERP systems, customer import and a channel connector, and the vendor's stated position is that if a system has an API it can be connected. What is absent is any named integration, object level sync description, developer documentation or marketplace listing, so the integration claim cannot be checked before a sales call.
The only infrastructure named anywhere is the website's host, Hetzner Online in Gunzenhausen, and the privacy policy scopes that naming to the website. Where the platform itself runs is unstated: no country, region, provider or option. Made in Germany is used as a marketing line and a German host is named, which is more than silence, but neither is a residency position for the buyer's data.
No certification, audit, trust page or documented control set is published for a platform holding sales content, prospect behavioural records, chat transcripts, signed contracts and a payment function. Encryption in transit is stated for the marketing website only, and secure and compliant appears as a marketing phrase rather than as evidence.
Graded at C for consistency with the other vendors here whose security surface is simply absent rather than misrepresented, with the sensitivity of what is stored as the reason to read this row harder than the grade alone suggests.
Two real numbers with a stated unit and currency: Starter at 19 euro and Professional at 49 euro per month, an annual or monthly toggle, a five user minimum, a fourteen day trial and self serve signup, so a buyer can budget a floor of roughly 95 euro a month without talking to anyone. Enterprise is quote only.
What keeps it off A is that all three tiers publish an identical feature list, so nothing on the page explains what the extra 30 euro buys, and Starter is described as perfect for individual users while requiring at least five of them.
The only legal documents published are a site notice and a website privacy policy. No customer terms, subscription agreement or service terms appear in the footer or navigation, leaving post termination data rights, deletion timelines and renewal mechanics undefined.
It sits at C rather than lower because an API is listed in every tier, which is an export path claim; the precedent set on Accent Technologies reserves the lower grade for a vendor with neither an export claim nor governing terms. The portability language in the privacy policy is a controller's obligation to a website visitor, not a customer export right.
Reminders leave the platform by email and text message and nothing is published on sending infrastructure, authentication, warmup, volume governance, complaint monitoring or degradation response. Structural exposure is lower than a sequencer's because the traffic is low volume follow up to an engaged prospect rather than cold outbound, but the customer's sending reputation is still carried by a system whose discipline is undescribed.
Coverage is evidenced rather than claimed: named customers span telecom, insurance, real estate, industrial and hospitality, three of them carrying linked cases. Against that, no vertical position, geography or company size band is published anywhere, and euro only pricing with a German and English interface points at a German speaking market the vendor never states. The five user minimum puts a real floor under the self serve tier.
Pricing
What this vendor charges, what it commits to in writing, and where the bill can move. Figures the vendor publishes itself are labeled Vendor Published. Figures labeled Estimated come from other sources and the vendor has not confirmed them.
- ›None of the prices load. The page shows three named plans, a monthly and yearly switch, and the words per month with nothing next to them. A machine reads the whole structure and none of the numbers.
- ›What does load is the thing that matters most: the cheapest plan has a minimum of five users. So the smallest purchase possible is five seats, even though that plan is described as suiting individuals.
- ›That means a team of two or three has no published way into this product at all, and you cannot work out what five seats would cost because no rate appears.
- ›Two good inclusions: unlimited layouts and unlimited projects per user per month. In this category the number of active deal rooms is usually what forces you to upgrade, and here it is uncapped.
- ›One feature worth thinking about before you switch it on: a countdown timer on projects. That is a pressure tactic aimed at your buyer, not a convenience.
How the price works
What you are charged for, and what makes the bill go up.
Tiered subscription with the tier structure served and every figure rendering client side. Three tiers are published by name, from an entry tier positioned for individual users entering digital selling, through a professional tier, to an enterprise tier routing to a quote.
No currency figure appears anywhere in the served document, in any currency, and no structured data offer object is present. The price position is labeled per month with an asterisk, and a monthly and annual billing toggle is present with the annual option promoted and its discount unquantified.
The entry tier carries a published minimum of five users.
Entitlements published per tier include unlimited configurable layouts, unlimited projects per month per user, a countdown mechanism on projects, and user administration. Projects and layouts being uncapped is stated rather than expressed as a large allowance.
A fourteen day free trial is published across the tiers, and the enterprise tier routes to a quote rather than a self serve purchase.
No seat rate, band, contract length or overage arrangement is established, since no figures were served.
What the contract says about your data
What the vendor commits to in writing once your data is in the product.
Not established beyond reachability. A privacy policy is published and reachable from the pricing page footer. No security page, trust surface, processing agreement or sub processor listing was located, and no certification claim, retention period or residency statement appears.
The contents of the privacy policy were not retrieved in this pass, so this record establishes that the document exists at a followable route rather than characterizing it.
The custody question is shaped by what a digital sales room product holds. The platform hosts material shared with named prospects and tracks their engagement with it, which means it retains behavioral data about individuals at buying organizations who never entered into any relationship with the vendor. Those individuals interact with a link, not with a signup, so they have no practical opportunity to review terms.
That is the same category of exposure recorded against the enablement platforms in this index and it deserves the same weight here. A buyer should establish what is captured about a viewer, how long it is retained, whether it is identifiable, and what a prospect can request if they ask.
The seat minimum published on the entry tier means the product is deployed across a team rather than by an individual, which widens the volume of prospect engagement data held.
Getting started
What it costs and what is included before the product is running.
None published and none located. No setup fee, onboarding charge, migration rate or professional services rate was found, and the trial is fourteen days.
The commitment structure is published even though the rates are not, and it is the part a buyer can act on. The entry tier carries a minimum of five users, so the smallest possible purchase is five seats regardless of the rate. Billing is offered monthly or annually, with the annual option promoted and the discount unquantified since neither set of figures was served.
The upper tier routes to a quote rather than a checkout, so the published ladder covers the lower and middle positions only.
What cannot be modeled is everything with a number attached. Because no rate rendered, a buyer cannot compute the five seat entry cost, cannot compare the annual and monthly options, and cannot size the gap between tiers. The seat minimum is therefore known and its consequence is not.
One entitlement reduces cost elsewhere and is published as uncapped: projects per month per user are unlimited, so a team running many concurrent deals is not metered on room count. In this category active room or deal caps are a common upgrade trigger, and removing that removes one reason to move up a tier.
User administration appears as a tier entitlement rather than a base feature, which for a product with a five seat floor means the ability to manage those seats may itself sit above the entry tier. A buyer should confirm which tier carries it.
What to watch for
Where this pricing can surprise a buyer who has not read it closely.
A complete tier structure with the entitlements published per tier and every figure rendering client side, so a machine reads the shape and none of the numbers.
The page publishes three tiers by name with a quoted fourth, carries a monthly and annual toggle, and labels the price position as per month with an asterisk. No currency figure appears anywhere in the served document, in any currency, and no structured data offer object exists. The figures arrive after the scripts run.
That places this vendor with ActiveCampaign, Clevenio and Bigin among those whose commercial terms are invisible to any automated reader, though it sits at the better end of that group: the tier names, the seat minimum, the entitlements and the billing options are all present, so what is missing is precisely and only the rates.
The seat minimum is the disclosure that most affects a buyer and it is published rather than discovered. The entry tier carries a minimum of five users. That inverts the usual shape, where the cheapest tier is the most accessible, and it means the entry product cannot be bought by an individual despite being described as suiting individual users entering digital selling. A team of two or three has no published route into this product at all.
Publishing a minimum on the tier card is the correct treatment and matches Aloware, which states its minimums in capitals. What differs here is that the minimum is published while the rate is not, so a buyer knows they must buy five seats without knowing what five seats cost.
Two entitlements are published as unlimited and both are the sort usually metered: configurable layouts, and projects per month per user. A per user unlimited project allowance is a meaningful commitment in a category where room count or active deal count is a common meter, and publishing it as uncapped rather than as a large number is worth crediting.
One feature named on the tier cards is unusual enough to record because it is a commercial mechanism rather than a capability: a countdown on projects. Time limiting a shared sales room changes the buyer's own negotiation dynamics, and a purchaser should understand it is a pressure tool before enabling it.
The trial is fourteen days.
No dollar figure is recorded in the numeric field because none was served in any currency.