Skip to content
Rechnungskit

How we compare

By · Published

We sell Rechnungskit, so our comparisons are not a neutral test. Here is what we promise instead: every statement about a competitor has a source and a date, our own gaps are in the same table, and every page names the cases where the other provider is the better fit.

Sources

We work from what the provider publishes itself: pricing pages, help centers, product documentation, API descriptions and terms of service. User reports from forums or review sites at most tell us where it's worth looking more closely. They never appear as fact.

Every price and every "No" carries a footnote with its source. The footnotes are at the end of each comparison page.

Criteria

All comparisons use the same table, so you can compare providers with each other too. Rows that only make sense for one group of providers (such as an own checkout for sales platforms) only appear there.

  • E-invoicing: ZUGFeRD 2.x / Factur-X outgoing, XRechnung for public-sector buyers, Validation before sending, Receive and process e-invoices
  • Shop automation: Own checkout link without a shop, Native shop and payment integrations, Invoicing on the correct date of supply, Automatic cancellation invoices on refunds, Payout reconciliation with fees
  • Tax compliance: OSS / EU distance selling, EU tax rates updated automatically, Qualified VAT ID (USt-IdNr.) check with evidence archive, Single- and multi-purpose vouchers (§3 (13) to (15) UStG), Deferred revenue (pRAP) / revenue recognition for subscriptions
  • DATEV & archive: Finished DATEV booking records, GoBD archive with locking (Festschreibung), Free access for your tax advisor
  • Accounting & operations: VAT return (UStVA) / cash-basis accounts (EÜR) / direct ELSTER filing, Entry price, API for your own systems

Rating levels

We only put "No" when the provider itself says the feature doesn't exist. If we find no evidence either way, the cell says "Not documented". Missing documentation never becomes a no.

Included Status: included The provider documents the feature as part of the standard product.
Limited Status: limited Available, but with limits that are spelled out in the cell.
Add-on Status: paid add-on Only at extra cost or through a separate module.
No Status: not available The provider itself says the feature does not exist.
Not documented Status: no reliable source found We found no reliable source either way.
Not applicable Status: not applicable The question doesn't arise for this product.
Note Status: note Context instead of a yes or no.

Our own gaps

The Rechnungskit column follows the same rules. We don't receive incoming invoices, so the table says "No". VAT returns (UStVA), cash-basis accounts (EÜR) and filing via ELSTER stay with your tax advisor; that row says "Limited" along with what we deliver. Every page also has a section on when the competitor is the better choice.

Review dates and updates

Every page carries two dates. The source-check date says when we last checked the competitors' information against their sources (currently July 28, 2026). The update date says when the page content last changed (currently October 3, 2026), usually the Rechnungskit column or the FAQ. We re-check the sources once a quarter.

Report a mistake

Found a mistake, or has a provider changed a feature? Write to support@rechnungskit.de. We check it, correct the statement and set a new date. That applies to tips from competitors, too.

All comparisons →

de en