Satelligence Alternatives

5 of 11 products that share a software category or a capability term with Satelligence, matched on what their records document.

Alternative products to investigate

Among the products whose records share the most documented attributes with Satelligence: Coolset, IntegrityNext, osapiens HUB, Polygon One and Source Intelligence (alphabetical, not a ranking).

Satelligence record checked 2 October 2026. Sources and limitations in the Satelligence profile · How candidates are matched · Already using Satelligence? What to check before switching

Satelligence's own record: categories, offline status, pricing and trial

Software categories: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Offline filter: Not yet classified. Pricing: Satelligence has no verified published paid amount recorded (model: “Quote-based”). Trial: trial status not established.

Coolset
Shares: Supply Chain Due Diligence and EUDR Compliance
Compare View profile
Why listed, where it differs, against Satelligence
Why listed: Categories shared with Satelligence: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Tags shared with Satelligence: EUDR Compliance. Capability names sharing a term: Satelligence's “EUDR due diligence” and Coolset's “EUDR due diligence”. Pricing: Coolset and Satelligence have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Conditional in Coolset's record (2 of 6 capabilities): “Polygon and point geolocation handling” and “ERP, API and MCP connectivity”.
Against Satelligence: Access, security and record controls: Coolset, “Statement versioning, digital signature and retention” (documented) and “Security attestations as shown by the vendor” (conditional).
IntegrityNext
Shares: Supply Chain Due Diligence and EUDR Compliance
Compare View profile
Why listed, where it differs, against Satelligence
Why listed: Categories shared with Satelligence: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Tags shared with Satelligence: EUDR Compliance. Capability names sharing a term: Satelligence's “EUDR due diligence” and IntegrityNext's “Supply chain due diligence”. Pricing: IntegrityNext and Satelligence have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Conditional in IntegrityNext's record: “Product-based supply chain mapping”.
Against Satelligence: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: IntegrityNext, “Forced labour screening and monitoring” and “LkSG and Norwegian Transparency Act support” (2 of 3); Satelligence, “Satellite method and forest baseline” and “Plot risk factors and flagged-plot handling” (2 of 3). Pricing model: IntegrityNext, “Quote-based; EUDR Starter at a fixed annual price”; Satelligence, “Quote-based”. Access, security and record controls: IntegrityNext, “Integrations and platform hosting” (documented).
osapiens HUB
Shares: Supply Chain Due Diligence and EUDR Compliance
Compare View profile
Why listed, where it differs, against Satelligence
Why listed: Categories shared with Satelligence: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Tags shared with Satelligence: EUDR Compliance. Capability names sharing a term: Satelligence's “EUDR due diligence” and osapiens HUB's “EUDR due diligence”. Pricing: osapiens HUB and Satelligence have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: osapiens HUB, documented offline workflow; Satelligence, not yet classified. Software categories assigned to osapiens HUB only: Carbon Accounting and Audit Management. Conditional in osapiens HUB's record (2 of 5 capabilities): “Product carbon footprints” and “Reporting and disclosure preparation”.
Against Satelligence: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: osapiens HUB, “Offline mobile audits” and “Audit planning and CAPA closure”; Satelligence, “Satellite method and forest baseline” and “Statement submission, locking and API”. Pricing model: osapiens HUB, “Contact vendor”; Satelligence, “Quote-based”.
Polygon One
Shares: Supply Chain Due Diligence and EUDR Compliance
Compare View profile
Why listed, where it differs, against Satelligence
Why listed: Categories shared with Satelligence: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Tags shared with Satelligence: EUDR Compliance. Capability names sharing a term: Satelligence's “EUDR due diligence” and Polygon One's “EUDR due diligence”; Satelligence's “Statement submission, locking and API” and Polygon One's “Statement submission and reference numbers”. Pricing: Polygon One and Satelligence have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Conditional in Polygon One's record (1 of 2 capabilities): “Geodata validation gaps”.
Against Satelligence: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Polygon One, “GeoJSON and point geodata intake”. Access, security and record controls: Polygon One, “ERP API, hosting and retention” (conditional).
Source Intelligence
Shares: Supply Chain Due Diligence and EUDR Compliance
Compare View profile
Why listed, where it differs, against Satelligence
Why listed: Categories shared with Satelligence: Supply Chain Due Diligence. Tags shared with Satelligence: EUDR Compliance. Capability names sharing a term: Satelligence's “EUDR due diligence” and Source Intelligence's “EUDR due diligence”. Pricing: Source Intelligence and Satelligence have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Conditional in Source Intelligence's record (2 of 3 capabilities): “Geolocation validation” and “ERP and PLM data integration”.
Against Satelligence: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Source Intelligence, “Mitigation workflow and documentation”.

Check the same evidence-led view from each candidate's starting point; its matched set may differ because the documented record differs.

Coolset alternatives IntegrityNext alternatives osapiens HUB alternatives Polygon One alternatives Source Intelligence alternatives

6 more not listed. Browse the Supply Chain Due Diligence category.

Already using Satelligence? What its record leaves open

Limitations the Satelligence profile records:

Pricing is not published
Commodity coverage is only partly enumerated

Available only under stated conditions or not documented (checked 2 October 2026): Commodity coverage; Event feed, projects, roles and supplier download. Check each against the contract you hold.

Satelligence evaluation checks, for every candidate

Commodity and region coverage: Give the vendor your real commodities and origin countries and obtain written coverage, including cattle and wood. The EUDR page names four commodities, so do not assume the rest. Source
Accuracy claim reconciliation: Pages cite different accuracy figures, so ask which metric, commodity and region each refers to and request the assurance report scope. Test known plots where you hold ground truth and keep the comparison. Source
Baseline and forest definition: Ask how the forest baseline treats perennial crops and which definition applies per country. The FAQ cites an FAO-based definition and an article describes a curated baseline; obtain the written method. Source
Case tracker and audit log: Open a flagged plot, record supplier explanations and photos, close it and export the log. Check who can change a decision and whether changes are logged. Source
Submission, locking and credentials: Generate a test statement, lock the supply chain and ask who holds TRACES credentials and what happens on rejection. Keep the locked record as audit evidence. Source
Security scope and price: The profile lists ISAE 3000 and ISO 27001 and the FAQ cites further standards with SSO; request current reports and their scope. No price is published, so obtain a quote by plot and statement volume. Source

Leaving Satelligence: what to plan for

A platform that generates due diligence statements, submits them to the EU system and locks the supply chain for audit leaves records your team may be asked to show later. Export every generated statement, the locked record and the audit log for flagged plots before cancelling. Ask who holds the submission credentials, since the record says credentials and failure handling are not described.
Plot geometries and supporting documents arrive through uploads, forms and an interface for automated syncs, and no file formats are stated in the record. Suppliers have already been asked for this data once. Take plot files and documents in a format a new tool accepts, and check whether supplier-facing request pages are replaced or must be sent again.
Flagged plots go through a case tracker with supplier explanations, and results rest on imagery of given dates and a forest baseline. The reasoning for clearing or excluding a plot matters later, so export decisions, evidence and baseline details, not only the risk label. A new provider may use a different baseline, so results on the same plots can differ and should be reconciled.

Who may have reason to stay with Satelligence

Commodity coverage deserves a second look. The record's main page names four commodities and says coverage of cattle and wood is not established. If yours sit in the named list, staying avoids re-validating; if you depend on cattle or wood, the open question is not solved by staying either, so obtain written coverage from the present vendor as well as from any candidate.
Two assurance standards are listed on the main page, and the FAQ cites further security standards with single sign-on. Where a customer or auditor already accepted that evidence, a move means collecting equivalent reports again. A listing is not a report: the scope documents, not merely the wording, are what the record asks buyers to request.
The record describes a web platform with no offline or mobile field mode, so a reader might expect a move to cure that. It may matter less here, because the described flow has suppliers supplying plot data and the company works from satellite imagery rather than inspectors typing in the field. Check whether field capture is a real requirement before treating it as a reason to leave.

What to test in a trial of a replacement for Satelligence

Give the candidate ten plots where you hold ground truth and compare the results with those from the present tool, noting imagery dates and the baseline used. Pages in the record cite different accuracy figures, so ask each vendor which metric, commodity and region a figure refers to, and keep the comparison as evidence of how you chose.
Generate a test statement, lock the supply chain and submit it, and ask for a rejection case, since credentials and failure handling are left undescribed. Keep the locked record as audit evidence, and note who can change a decision after locking and whether the change is logged. A candidate that cannot show a rejection has not shown its failure path.
The help centre describes projects, owner-assigned roles by project, an event feed with saved filters and downloads for supplier engagement, but for the monitoring platform. Create two projects, one per commodity, invite a user limited to one, filter the feed and download results for a supplier conversation. Then ask which of these apply to plot results, and run the same steps in each candidate.

Conditions and sources in the Satelligence profile · Recorded commercial terms