Mandato vs Sudespacho.net: pricing and reviews (2026)

We start here because it is the part a comparison page usually buries. If your firm lives on the telephone, their virtual switchboard — dial from the record, recording saved against the contact — has no equivalent in Mandato. If you need a native iOS or Android app, theirs exists and ours does not yet: Mandato installs from the browser and opens full screen, which works well but is not the same thing.

If you do advisory work alongside law, their catalogue covers tax obligations and official ledgers, and there is an employee portal with time tracking and holidays. Mandato does none of that: it exports to Holded and that is where our accounting ends. And if the way you work depends on wiring the software to other tools, they publish an API and appear in Zapier; we have no public API today, and our security page says so too.

On top of that sits what money cannot buy quickly: twenty years, more than 2,500 firms, and support with a reputation for answering. When something breaks on a Friday afternoon, knowing who to call is worth money. If that is your main criterion, stay where you are.

Their CRM starts at €35.95/month, below our €49. The difference is not in the first line of the invoice but in the ones after it. The client portal is a different product starting at €26.96/month. The WhatsApp that genuinely lives inside the matter — the Business API one, with the whole team on it and the history centralised — costs €300 a year plus €0.06 per marketing message and €0.02 per customer-service message; the cheap tier opens a browser tab and leaves the conversation on the user's own phone, with no copy in the CRM. Extra users appear at €15/month in third-party listings, a figure we could not read on their own site.

In Mandato that same set — WhatsApp Business on a firm number, a client portal in two languages, AI and VeriFactu invoicing — is inside the €49 per user per month, with no per-message fee. We are not claiming it always works out cheaper: a sole practitioner who wants neither portal nor WhatsApp pays less with them. We are claiming that Mandato's price is the price, and that theirs depends on how many modules you end up contracting.

A note on transparency, because it is easy to mistake for an accusation: Sudespacho.net publishes "from" prices on several pages but no complete rate card. That is a perfectly legitimate commercial choice and a common one in this market. It only means that to compare properly, you have to ask them for a quote.

Three things we looked for in their feature catalogue on 7 August 2026 and did not find. The first is Ley 10/2010 compliance: a KYC/AML file, enhanced due diligence, sanctions screening and SEPBLAC reporting. For a firm that incorporates companies, buys property on a client's behalf or handles funds, that obligation exists with or without software, and in Mandato it lives inside the matter.

The second is their own AI. Their site publishes no document-extraction module; third-party listings mention an Iberley IA integration through their API. In Mandato a nota simple arrives in the matter and is read on the way in: charges, owners and surface area land in the fields without anyone typing them.

The third is genuine bilingualism. Their product and their site are in Spanish, and we found no public information about an English interface, portal and templates. Mandato was built inside a firm serving clients of more than twenty nationalities, so the client sees the matter in their own language and templates exist written in both, not machine-translated.

In all three cases the cell says "not listed on their site", which is not the same as "they don't have it". If they do and it is published somewhere we did not look, write to us and we will correct it.