Comparison
VisionParse vs Rossum
A purpose-built invoice platform for large finance teams, starting at $18,000 a year. They state that customer documents are also used for their own research and development.
Rossum · every figure below comes from their own documentation, linked and dated · last checked 2026-08-08
Where Rossum is the better choice
- Built specifically for accounts-payable teams: validation screens, approval routing and ERP integrations we do not have.
- EU data centres including Frankfurt as the default for new customers, with published backup regions.
- A dedicated review interface for correcting extractions at volume, which is where AP teams actually spend their time.
Where we are
- Their entry tier starts at $18,000 a year. Ours starts at $19 a month, and you can see the number before speaking to anyone.
- Your documents are used to serve you and nothing else. Rossum states that customer documents are also processed for "further research and development of data extraction technology".
- You can try it right now. Rossum has no free plan — access begins with a gated 14-day trial request.
- 161 recognition languages fully supported. Rossum claims 276 but only 47 are fully supported, and 29 of those have pre-trained fields.
Side by side
| VisionParse | Rossum | |
|---|---|---|
| Text extraction price | $19/month for 2,000 pages — $9.50 per 1,000 | Not sold separately. Rossum publishes no per-page OCR rate and no standalone OCR or plain-text-extraction SKU; reading is bundled into the platform subscription, which the vendor states is priced on the volume of pages or documents processed plus workflow complexity.Rossum pricing is tailored to your business needs and automation scale, based on the volume of pages or documents you process and the complexity of your workflows. Additional services, integrations, and add-ons are available to enhance your return on automation.source, checked 2026-08-08 |
| Structured field extraction | 1 AI credit a document; 250 included on the $19 plan | Quote-based annual subscription. Only one of four tiers publishes a number: Starter "Starting at $18,000 per year". Business, Enterprise and Ultimate publish no price. Priced on volume of pages or documents processed plus workflow complexity, with a one-year minimum contract and per-additional-page overage at an unpublished rate.Starting at $18,000 per yearsource, checked 2026-08-08 |
| Free tier | 100 pages a month with an account; 5 conversions a day with none | No free plan and no recurring free allowance — all four published tiers are quote-based paid plans. The only free access is a 14-day trial, requested through a gated lead form. Per the Terms of Use it is one trial per customer, must not be used commercially, and no page or document cap is published anywhere.Rossum’s free trial is your chance to get your hands on the platform. Just take a few seconds to create an account, and you’ll be ready to process your first documents (invoices, sales orders, certificates of analysis, packing lists…).source, checked 2026-08-08 |
| Languages | 161 recognition languages, counted on the production host | 276 languages claimed, but that is "full or partial support". Only 47 are in the fully supported table (automatic language classification plus Instant Learning), and only 29 of those 47 also have pre-trained fields. The other 229 languages get Instant Learning only — no language detection, no pre-trained predictions. Handwriting is separate and much narrower: Rossum states 30 languages, and its own table marks 24 of them PARTIAL ("some diacritics may not be recognised") with only 7 unqualified.With the release of Aurora 1.5, the list of supported languages expanded significantly. We now offer full or partial support for 276 languages. This article provides all the details.source, checked 2026-08-08 |
| Where it runs | Hosted API, documents processed in Frankfurt, Germany | Cloud only, no on-premise. Customer data is stored "primarily" on AWS, in four published data-centre configurations: EU Frankfurt eu-central-1 (default for new customers, backup/recovery in Ireland), EU Ireland eu-west-1 (backup/recovery in Frankfurt), US us-east-1 N. Virginia (backup/recovery us-west-1 N. California), and Japan ap-northeast-1 Tokyo (backup/recovery ap-northeast-3 Osaka), each across multiple Availability Zones. The Terms of Use sub-processor schedule additionally names Google LLC and Microsoft Corporation as cloud sub-processors that receive uploaded documents, with personal-data location "EU (unless specifically agreed otherwise)". Architecture is multi-tenant by default; a single-tenant dedicated database is a paid commercial option. Choosing your region ("Preferred cloud location") is an Enterprise-tier feature.We offer an option of different AWS regions based on your data residency requirements. Within each region, our platform operates across multiple Availability Zones (physical data centers) to ensure high availability.source, checked 2026-08-08 |
| What happens to your documents | Uploads deleted within the hour on every plan; never used to train models | Yes, as a stated secondary purpose. Rossum's FAQ says customer-supplied documents are processed for data capture as the primary purpose and "further research and development of data extraction technology" as the secondary purpose. Separately (different sources): the Aurora FAQ offers an opt in/out of "improving Rossum Aurora for others using your data"; the security page lists "usage for AI training purposes" as a customer-configurable setting; the Terms of Use grant Rossum a perpetual right to use Customer Data as Training Data; and the Privacy Policy caps retention of uploaded-document information at 10 years from upload. Rossum's Privacy Policy bases this training use on legitimate interests, not customer consent.Rossum is fully committed to ensuring GDPR compliance. We process customer-supplied documents for the primary purpose of data capture, as instructed by our customers. The secondary purpose is further research and development of data extraction technology.source, checked 2026-08-08 |
What this page does not claim
We have never run a document through Rossum, so there is no accuracy comparison here and no chart showing us winning. Our own figures are measured and reproducible — the method is on the benchmark, including the cases where our default engine gets things wrong. Rossum's figures are theirs, quoted from their documentation with the date we read it.
Most comparison pages of this kind include an accuracy table. Ours cannot, honestly, so it does not.
Try it on your own documentSee pricing
Also compared: TesseractAWS TextractGoogle Document AIAzure AI Document IntelligenceABBYYAdobe PDF Services APINanonets