European Alternatives to Pave
Looking for a European alternative to Pave? Pave's privacy policy names Trove Information Technologies, Inc., based in San Francisco, as the controller, so every salary, equity grant and performance rating you connect from your HRIS is processed by a US company. Its homepage describes a benchmark built on 9,000+ integrated clients, and its pricing page offers a free Market Data Lite tier above paid platform packages.
The European tools below cover market benchmarks, salary bands, review cycles, pay equity reporting and equity plans, with contracting entities in France, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, the UK and Israel.
How we rank these tools — 4-step process
-
1
European ownership, verified
The company is headquartered and incorporated in the EU, EEA, the UK, Switzerland or Israel, and processes customer data in Europe or Israel. A US parent company disqualifies a tool from this page regardless of where its servers are.
-
2
Category fit and hands-on review
What the tool actually does, who it suits, and where it falls short — checked against the vendor’s own documentation, changelog and pricing page rather than its marketing copy.
-
3
Compliance and pricing check
GDPR posture, hosting location and the prices quoted on this page are verified against the vendor’s public pricing before publication, and re-checked when we revisit the category.
-
4
Position on this page
Placement on this page can be paid, and that can affect which tools appear here and the order they appear in. It never buys a good review: a tool that fails the checks above is not here at any price, and payment does not change the shortcomings we write about. A vendor can ask us to correct a factual error — not to remove a criticism.
Vendors can pay for visibility on this page. It never changes what an entry says about a product, including the criticism, and we earn nothing when you click through to a vendor. Vendors can pay for more visibility, higher up on the review pages; it never affects which tools are listed. Editorial policy
10 European Alternatives to Pave
Figures
Benchmarks, salary bands and review campaigns for mid-market HR teams
Ravio
Live pay benchmarks from 1,800+ contributing companies
Sysarb
Pay equity platform built around job architecture and pay ranges
Qomben
Paris compensation suite for budgets, reviews, bonuses and benefits
TalentUp
Salary benchmarks and a pay transparency tool from EUR 60 a month
beqom
Swiss platform for global pay cycles, incentives and pay equity
Leapsome
Compensation reviews as a EUR 3 module inside a talent suite
HiBob
Compensation cycles with budget guardrails inside an HR platform
Ledgy
Equity plans, deferred pay and carried interest administration
Lucca
Variable pay collection and wage bill reporting from a French HR suite
Key takeaways
- Pave is operated by Trove Information Technologies, Inc. in San Francisco, which its privacy policy names as the controller of the pay data it processes.
- Pave describes its benchmark as built on more than 9,000 integrated clients and offers a free Market Data Lite tier above its paid packages.
- Ravio documents live pay data from over 1,800 contributing companies in 45+ countries, but its contracting entity is a UK company.
- TalentUp, in Barcelona, publishes a EUR 60 per month Pro plan, which makes it the one tool here with a price visible before a demo.
- Figures SAS in Nanterre and Sysarb AB in Arboga both sell pay equity reporting for the Pay Transparency Directive as part of the product.
Why people leave Pave
Pave is a compensation platform sold by Trove Information Technologies, Inc., which trades as Pave and sits in San Francisco. Its privacy policy names that company as the controller, so the pay records that flow in from a payroll or HR system are handled by a US entity. For a works council or a data protection officer in Europe, that sentence is often where the questions begin.
The pricing page shows how the product is packaged. Market Data comes in a Lite and a Pro version, Pave Agent adds market intelligence and workflows driven by an assistant, and four add-ons cover compensation planning, a manager view of the team, total rewards statements and visual offer letters. Prices are given on request, and the homepage describes a benchmark built on more than 9,000 integrated clients.
People look beyond Pave for three practical reasons: they want a contracting entity inside the EU, EEA, UK or Switzerland, they need pay equity reporting for the Pay Transparency Directive next to the benchmark, or they want one supplier for salary bands and review cycles instead of a stack of add-ons. Each of those has a European tool with a different shape, covered below.
- The controller is a company in San Francisco Pave states in its privacy policy that Trove Information Technologies, Inc. is the controller. Every salary, grant and rating you connect is therefore processed by a US business, and a transfer assessment goes into your records before the contract is signed. The tools on this page are contracted through companies in France, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Israel instead.
- The module list is long and priced on request The Pave pricing page splits the product into data plans, an assistant layer and four add-ons, and it gives no figures. A buyer has to ask which combination matches the use case before any budget can be set. Several European tools do the same, but TalentUp prints a monthly price and Ledgy prints its Scale plan, which makes a first comparison possible without a sales call.
- Pay equity is not the headline Pave leads with market data and planning. The Pay Transparency Directive pushes employers toward gap analysis by category of worker, and European vendors have built that into their core offer: Sysarb starts from job architecture, Figures sells a separate Pay Transparency plan, and beqom links PayAnalytics. If the audit trail matters more than the benchmark, the starting point differs.
- The benchmark panel is not your market A panel of 9,000 integrated clients is a large sample, but a buyer in Lyon or Gothenburg still has to check how many comparable European employers sit inside it. Ravio publishes a count of 1,800 contributing companies across 45 countries, and Figures adds an optional Mercer dataset. Ask each vendor for coverage in your country and job family before comparing headline numbers.
What you have to replace, not just match
Replacing Pave means replacing a data subscription first. The benchmark is the part you cannot rebuild from your own payroll, so the first question for each European tool is where its market numbers come from: a contributor panel (Ravio), an own panel plus a Mercer option (Figures), partners such as Mercer and WTW (beqom), credit-based reports (TalentUp), or no external dataset at all (Sysarb, Ledgy). Plan for a second data source if you choose one of the last group.
The planning layer is the second piece. Pave sells Compensation Planning, Team View and Total Rewards as separate add-ons, so a company that bought all of them has budgets, manager views and employee statements to move. Qomben offers budget, salary review, variable pay and benefits modules, HiBob ties comp cycles to its HR platform, and Leapsome and Lucca run review cycles inside broader people suites. Check which of your current add-ons has no direct equivalent.
Equity is the third. Pave has no cap table and nothing on this page claims otherwise, but teams that track grants next to salaries will want to decide where grant data lives after the move. Ledgy handles share plans and executive awards in Switzerland, and it does not plan salaries, so it pairs with one of the others rather than replacing Pave alone.
The alternatives compared
| Position | Tool | Headquarters | Pricing | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Figures | Nanterre, France | Three plans (Structure, Companion, Pay Transparency) with no published prices; quote on request | EU (France) |
| #2 | Ravio | London, United Kingdom | Annual subscription (12 or 24 months), price on request | United Kingdom (adequacy decision, outside the EEA) |
| #3 | Sysarb | Arboga, Sweden | Three all-inclusive tiers (Structure, Analyze, Involve) priced by number of employees; quote on request | EU (Sweden) |
| #4 | Qomben | Paris, France | No prices published; demo on request | EU (France) |
| #5 | TalentUp | Barcelona, Spain | Pro EUR 60/month with 1 benchmark credit per month; extra credits EUR 60 each; Premium on request | EU (Spain) |
| #6 | beqom | Nyon, Switzerland | No published prices; demo on request | Switzerland (adequacy decision, outside the EEA) |
| #7 | Leapsome | Berlin, Germany | From about $8/user/month | EU (Germany) |
| #8 | HiBob | Tel Aviv, Israel | No published prices; quote via form | Israel (outside the EU/EEA) |
| #9 | Ledgy | Zurich, Switzerland | Launch plan free (up to 50 stakeholders); Scale from EUR 5,000/year; other plans on request | Switzerland (adequacy decision, outside the EEA) |
| #10 | Lucca | Paris, France | Per module, per employee/month excl. VAT (indicative, 100+ employees): Core HR €3.21, Absences €3.11, Timesheets €3.00, Performance €3.97, Engagement €3.16; no minimum term | EU (France) |
How each alternative compares to Pave
Best for: HR teams in France or the EU that want Pave-style planning with an EU contracting entity
Figures SAS in Nanterre is the tool that most resembles Pave in scope. The Structure plan holds benchmarks and bands, Companion adds review campaigns with budgets and approvals, and a separate Pay Transparency plan carries the Directive reports. Pave splits similar scope across Market Data and add-ons, while Figures uses three plans.
On data, Figures sells its own benchmark panel and an optional Mercer integration that the vendor puts at more than 3.5 million datapoints. Pave states 9,000+ integrated clients. The two figures count different things, so ask each vendor how many comparable employers they hold for your country, then compare.
What Figures does better than Pave
- EU contracting entity and storage in Europe on AWS
- Pay Transparency plan can be bought alone
- Letters and decision history built into the campaign flow
- SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001 certification
Where Figures is a step down from Pave
- No free market data tier
- Smaller company, about 30 people per its own About page
- No published prices and several add-ons
Standout against Pave. Figures pairs a sandbox for testing a review cycle with pay equity checks that run before raises are approved.
Best for: Scale-up HR teams that want a live market panel and levelling help before any workflow
Ravio is the closest European match for what many teams actually use Pave for, which is the benchmark. Its help centre describes continuously updated pay data from 1,800+ contributing companies in 45+ countries, filtered by location, funding stage and headcount, with its own specialists mapping and levelling your roles.
Against Pave it is lighter on process: the help centre documents benchmarking, bands and pay equity but no manager approval workflow. The contracting entity is Ravio Technologies Ltd in London, outside the EU, with a minimum 12-month contract invoiced annually. Pricing and hosting region are not published.
What Ravio does better than Pave
- Panel size, location filters and contributor counts stated in the open
- Role mapping and levelling done by Ravio staff
- Pay equity analysis aimed at the Directive
- Covers base, equity, variable and benefits
Where Ravio is a step down from Pave
- UK entity, not an EU company
- No documented review-cycle workflow
- Annual contract of at least 12 months
Standout against Pave. Ravio is the tool here that publishes how many companies feed its market data and in how many countries.
Best for: Organisations that must build job architecture and then prove pay is equitable
Sysarb AB works in the opposite order from Pave. Its three tiers are Structure, Analyze and Involve, each including the previous one, so job evaluation, job architecture and pay ranges come before analysis and manager dashboards. Pave starts from external market data and adds planning around it.
The vendor, founded in 2005, says it has 40 employees and more than 1,000 HR teams on the platform, and it lists 70+ integrations. Its tier list shows no market dataset, so a benchmark source is a separate purchase. The salary review product page was password protected, so its depth could not be read.
What Sysarb does better than Pave
- Job architecture and pay ranges included from the first tier
- Compliance reporting for the Directive in the second tier
- Employee and manager dashboards in the third
- Swedish company with ISO 27001
Where Sysarb is a step down from Pave
- No market salary dataset on the tier list
- Prices tied to headcount and not published
- A vendor of about 40 people
Standout against Pave. Sysarb ties a pay equity report to a documented job architecture instead of to a purchased benchmark.
Best for: Compensation and benefits teams in French or international groups running the full cycle
Qomben SAS from Paris sells six modules: budget and payroll, salary review, variable pay and bonus, benefits, benchmark and pay transparency. Compared with Pave, it places more weight on cycle steering and total rewards statements than on a market panel, and its Quantix engine lets customers define their own pay rules.
Two points need clarification in a contract. The benchmark module does not name its data source, so a team that needs external market data should ask directly. The platform runs on Microsoft Azure without a stated region. The site is French first, with an English version available.
What Qomben does better than Pave
- Variable pay and bonus handled in the same suite
- Personalised total rewards statements for employees
- Configurable pay rules via Quantix
- French company with a French and English interface
Where Qomben is a step down from Pave
- Benchmark data source not described
- Azure region not named
- No published prices
Standout against Pave. Qomben simulates the wage bill under different scenarios before a hire is made, then carries the result into the review.
Best for: Small companies that need market ranges for a few roles and a first pay gap check
TalentUp is operated by Talent Up Sourcing S.L. in Barcelona under Spanish law. Its Pro plan costs EUR 60 per month with one benchmark credit, extra credits cost EUR 60 each, and Premium is quoted. Pave offers a free Lite tier on the data side, but its paid packages are on request, so TalentUp is the one with a visible paid entry point.
The limits are explicit. Internal compensation management and the Pay Transparency Compliance Tool in Pro cover up to 25 employees, and one credit per month does not price a full job architecture. There is no review-cycle workflow or approval chain. Hosting region is not stated.
What TalentUp does better than Pave
- Published monthly price without a demo
- Free reports and a Directive guide
- Pay transparency tool included in Pro
- Spanish company under Spanish law
Where TalentUp is a step down from Pave
- 25-employee cap on internal tools in Pro
- No review-cycle workflow or budget control
- Credit model gets costly for many roles
Standout against Pave. TalentUp is the only benchmark vendor here where a buyer can read the price of one extra benchmark.
Best for: Large groups with several legal entities, countries and incentive schemes to model
beqom SA in Nyon has worked on compensation since 2009. Its PaySuite covers pay cycles, performance, long-term incentives, and pay equity through PayAnalytics. It names Allianz, PUMA and TotalEnergies among its success stories, and the TotalEnergies story speaks of 130 countries and 316 employee agreements.
That makes it a heavier project than Pave for most mid-sized employers. Market data comes through partnerships with Mercer and WTW, not an own panel. beqom also keeps a New York office and sells strongly in the US, which a buyer who wants an EU-only footprint may weigh. Prices and hosting region are not published.
What beqom does better than Pave
- Handles complex multi-entity pay rules
- Long-term incentives product
- Swiss company with a named privacy officer and EU and UK representatives
- Named enterprise references in Europe
Where beqom is a step down from Pave
- Oversized for companies of a few hundred people
- Market data from third parties
- US sales presence and New York office
Standout against Pave. beqom is built for rule sets with many entities, such as 316 employee agreements across 130 countries in one customer story.
Best for: Companies that run reviews and goals in Leapsome and want pay cycles tied to them
Leapsome GmbH in Berlin sells compensation as one module beside performance, OKRs, engagement and learning. Its site describes review cycles linked to performance outcomes, salary bands, benchmarking, budget tracking and pay equity dashboards. Against Pave, the benefit is a shared rating and pay history in one product.
The pair data for this page lists the Compensation module at EUR 3 per employee per month and the benchmarks add-on at EUR 3 more, per its pricing page. Leapsome does not do HR administration, so it needs a separate system of record. It is not a stand-alone benchmark service in the way Ravio or Pave Market Data are.
What Leapsome does better than Pave
- Compensation tied to performance and goal data
- Module prices that can be read and added up
- German company with EU processing
- One login for reviews, OKRs and pay
Where Leapsome is a step down from Pave
- Not a dedicated benchmark panel
- Needs a separate HR system of record
- Costs rise with headcount and module count
Standout against Pave. Leapsome lets a manager see performance evidence and the pay proposal in the same review.
Best for: HR teams that already run Bob and want budgets and equity checks on the same data
HiBob sells compensation as a module of the Bob platform, with customisable comp cycle workflows, budget tracking visible to Finance, scenario planning on real employee data and guardrails that alert on proposals outside a pay range. Pave sells similar planning as an add-on to separate data products; HiBob uses the HRIS as the source.
The privacy policy names Hi Bob Limited as the operator and Hi Bob Ltd. as database controller under Israeli law, and Israel counts as European for this directory. The page read does not say whether the module can be bought without the HR platform, and prices go through a form. The benchmark source is not named.
What HiBob does better than Pave
- Same data as the HR system, no export step
- Budget overrun visible to Finance in real time
- Pay equity analyzer running during the cycle
- Manager context inside the workflow
Where HiBob is a step down from Pave
- Sold as part of the Bob platform
- Benchmark source not named
- Contracting entity to confirm before signing
Standout against Pave. HiBob flags a proposal outside the pay range while the manager is still entering it.
Best for: Companies with employee share plans, deferred awards or a cap table to maintain
Ledgy AG is a Swiss stock corporation that handles cap tables, equity plans, share plan administration and deferred compensation. It does not plan salaries or benchmark the market, so it replaces only the equity part of what Pave covers and sits next to a planning or benchmark tool from this list.
The Launch plan is free for up to 50 stakeholders with simple vesting, and Scale starts at EUR 5,000 per year with 70+ HRIS integrations, including Personio, HiBob and Lucca. Plans above Scale are quoted. Carried interest support is announced and not yet released, and the hosting region is not stated.
What Ledgy does better than Pave
- Free plan for small cap tables
- Published Scale price
- Share plan administration and deferred compensation
- Swiss company with 70+ HRIS integrations
Where Ledgy is a step down from Pave
- No salary planning or benchmarks
- Free plan stops at 50 stakeholders
Standout against Pave. Ledgy is the only tool on this page that manages share plans and cap tables.
Best for: Companies already on Lucca modules that want pay review in the same suite
Lucca SAS in Paris has sold HR software since 2002 and prices its modules per employee per month, with no minimum term. The published prices apply to companies above 100 employees and include Core HR at EUR 3.21 and Performance at EUR 3.97. It sits closer to a people suite than to a compensation specialist.
Hosting is documented: OVHcloud in France and Germany with encrypted backups at Scaleway, and Azure in Switzerland for Swiss customers. The site does not claim a dedicated benchmark panel, so market data would come from elsewhere. Running several modules adds up to more than a bundled all-in-one.
What Lucca does better than Pave
- Published per-module prices and no minimum term
- European hosting end to end for most customers
- ISO 27001 since July 2022
- Paris company with a long track record
Where Lucca is a step down from Pave
- No dedicated benchmark panel
- Several modules cost more than one bundled plan
Standout against Pave. Lucca discloses hosting providers and countries for each customer group, which few vendors here do.
What actually breaks when you switch
The first thing that breaks is the data link. Pave connects to HRIS and payroll systems to read salaries, grants and ratings, and those connectors do not move to another vendor. Figures lists 30+ HRIS integrations, Ravio over 30 HR systems, Sysarb 70+, and Ledgy 70+ on Scale. Check your own HR system on that list before you shortlist, and expect a mapping exercise for job titles, levels and locations that takes longer than the contract.
Second, history and contracts. Past review decisions, band definitions and any offer letter templates need to be exported while you still have access, and Ravio requires 12 to 24 months committed, so overlap is expensive. Run one cycle in parallel if the budget allows. Retrain managers last: tools such as HiBob and Leapsome show different context inside the workflow, and the first cycle after switching is where errors show.
Does moving from Pave to a European tool remove the need for a transfer assessment?
It removes the transfer to a US controller for the compensation data itself, which is the main point of the move. Figures, Sysarb, Qomben, TalentUp and Lucca contract through EU companies. Ravio and Ledgy, with beqom, sit in the UK and Switzerland, where the EU recognises adequacy, and HiBob is an Israeli company, so those three need a note in the record rather than a full assessment.
Sub-processors still count. Figures names AWS in Europe, Lucca names OVHcloud and Scaleway, and Qomben names Microsoft Azure without a region. For tools where the hosting region is not stated, ask for it in writing, since a European contracting party can still run on a US cloud provider.
Can one European tool replace the whole Pave stack?
Not usually. Pave combines data, planning, manager views, rewards statements and offer letters. Figures covers benchmarks, bands, review campaigns and pay equity, and Qomben covers budgets, reviews, variable pay, benefits statements and a benchmark module, so those two come closest in breadth. Neither lists a visual offer letter among its features, so check that against your hiring process.
Others are narrower on purpose. Ravio leads with data, Sysarb with structure and equity analysis, Ledgy with shares. Many teams end up with two tools, for example a benchmark source plus a planning tool, and that is a normal outcome rather than a failure of the migration.
Which one to pick
If you use Pave mainly for planning and want an EU contracting entity, start with Figures or Qomben, and add HiBob or Leapsome when your HR platform is already one of them. If the benchmark is the part you rely on, Ravio is the most open about its data, while TalentUp is the cheaper entry for a handful of roles.
If the pressure comes from the Pay Transparency Directive, Sysarb and Figures sell the reporting as a core product, and beqom suits groups with many entities. Pick Ledgy only for share plans, and expect to keep Pave or a European planning tool next to it. Pave remains the larger dataset on its own description, so a company that depends on a 9,000-client panel should test coverage before leaving.
Frequently Asked Questions
It depends on which part of Pave you use. For breadth, Figures (France) and Qomben (France) combine benchmarks or budgets with review cycles and pay transparency reporting. For market data, Ravio (UK) is the most open about its panel. For pay structure and gap reporting, Sysarb (Sweden). For a visible price, TalentUp (Spain) at EUR 60 per month, and for shares, Ledgy (Switzerland).
Ledgy has a free Launch plan, but it covers cap tables for up to 50 stakeholders and not market data. TalentUp offers free downloadable salary reports and a Directive guide, with the Pro plan at EUR 60 per month. None of the European benchmark vendors reviewed here offers a free live benchmark, so the Lite tier is one place where Pave is ahead.
Figures has a separate Pay Transparency plan with legal reports by category of worker and request letters. Sysarb tracks the Directive by country and offers compliance reporting. Ravio and beqom offer pay equity analysis aimed at the Directive, Qomben announces a module for the 2027 obligations, and TalentUp includes a compliance tool in Pro, limited to 25 employees.
Mostly not. TalentUp lists EUR 60 per month for Pro, Ledgy lists a free plan and Scale from EUR 5,000 per year, Leapsome quotes from $8 per user per month, and Lucca prints per-module prices for companies above 100 employees. Figures, Ravio, Sysarb, Qomben, beqom and HiBob quote on request, which is the same position as Pave.
HiBob if the HR system is already Bob, since comp cycles use the same employee data. Leapsome and Lucca if performance or engagement modules are in use, because compensation is then one more module in a platform you already run. Check that their review depth matches Pave Compensation Planning before deciding.
Related comparisons
European tools head to head
About the author
Explore More European Alternatives
Discover privacy-focused European alternatives to other popular US tech services.