Published verdictRanking snapshot 3 November 2026
Divly leads by 16 points
Divly scores 16 points above Ledgible, led by your tax form, cost-basis method, and complex transactions.
Divly #4 of 1178LELedgible #11 of 1162
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.Why, term by termDivly leads on 3 of 4 published criteria; Ledgible on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermDivlyLedgibleWeightPoints
Your tax form9/105/107.7+8.0for Divly+4.1 of 32
Cost-basis method7/104/106.2+4.9for Divly+2.5 of 32
Complex transactions7/105/105.3+2.7for Divly+1.4 of 32
Net of the terms+15.6
Reproduced gap+15.6
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below7862+16.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
DivlyScore 78The European filing specialist: one served table naming K4/SRU, Anlage SO, SA108, 2086, PIT-38 and Modelo D-100 across fourteen jurisdictions, a Skatteverket-native SRU upload, a per-disposal 'applied_rule_for_disposal' column proving s.104 same-day/30-day matching ran, and an in-app tax-year selector that defaults to 2025 as the CURRENT year - undercut by a EUR 39 headline that buys only 100 transactions, a delivered ledger that never states the acquisition date of the lot it matched, no closing-position output in any jurisdiction, and a 2021 Terms document that never mentions the 'lifetime access ... forever' its help centre promises.Strength: Named form output — 9/10Watch-out: Four one-way doors, none of them on the page you buy from, and two of them invisible without reading Divly's own shipped code. (1) THE PRICE YOU SEE IS THE 100-TRANSACTION PRICE - CONFIRMED AT THE SOURCE. https://divly.com/en/pricing advertises Essential at '39' 'EUR', but that is the first cell of a four-column ladder wired into the page's own inline script. From the served source on 2026-08-19: 'const pricingMatrix = { 0: [0, 39, 99, 599], 1: [0, 99, 199, 699], 2: [0, 199, 399, 799], 3: [0, 399, 699, 999] };'. The mapping is not inferred - the bracket buttons carry it: '<button class="transaction-btn active" data-index="0" onclick="updatePricing(0)">Up to 100</button>', then data-index 1 'Up to 1,000', 2 'Up to 10,000', 3 'Up to 100,000'; the script ends with 'updatePricing(0);' and the server-rendered spans read '<span id="price-essential">39</span>'. EUR 39 buys 'Up to 100' transactions for the year. At 'Up to 1,000' Essential is EUR 99; at 'Up to 10,000' EUR 199; at 'Up to 100,000' EUR 399 - and Full Service starts at EUR 599, not the EUR 499 this repo's catalog row records. Anyone with a routine DCA habit is in the 1,000+ bracket and pays 2.5x the headline. (2) ONCE YOU DOWNLOAD, YOU CANNOT UNBUY, AND THE TERMS AND THE HELP CENTRE DISAGREE. Terms: 'It is not possible to get a refund if you have downloaded a file from the tax report section in the platform.' - flat, unqualified. https://help.divly.com/en/articles/8233489-can-i-request-a-refund ('February 3, 2026') sets three requirements - 'You make the request within 14 days of purchasing the service.' / 'The reason for refund is related to a bug or issue that Divly is unable to resolve within a reasonable time frame.' / 'You have not downloaded any tax reports.' - and then adds a fourth: 'This does not apply if the issue is related to the tax report.' So the help centre carves out the commonest case while the binding contract does not; the Terms govern, and the disagreement is the finding. Either way, dissatisfaction that is not a Divly bug is not a refund reason. Worse, the Terms purport to cancel the EU statutory withdrawal right within the same clause that grants it, under the heading 'Your right to terminate the Agreement pre-maturely': 'If you are a consumer, you have the right to withdraw from this Agreement without giving any reason within 14 days.' ... and, four sentences later, 'Since this is a Service we will not, if you withdraw from this Agreement, refund any payments we received from you.' (3) THE PRICING PAGE IS NOT THE WHOLE PRICE LIST - three charges exist that it never shows, all read from Divly's own app bundle (plugin_v23.js, downloaded 2026-08-19). A per-hour overage on the top tier, stated in the help centre: Full Service 'includes 4 hours of work by the Divly Expert. In most cases this is enough, however if extra hours are required they will be charged at 150 EUR per hour.' A priority-service add-on with a four-figure fallback: 'get_priority_service_price:function(){return this.pricing_info&&this.pricing_info.priority_service_price?this.pricing_info.priority_service_price:1e3}'. And an early-bird tier system fetched at checkout: 'fetch_early_bird_tiers:async function(){try{const e=await(await fetch(Fe+"/client/get_early_bird_tiers")).json();'. (4) A TIER THE PRICING PAGE SELLS IS HARDCODED AS UNBUYABLE. The same bundle contains 'is_sold_out_tier_value:function(t){return typeof t!="string"?!1:t.replace("-EARLY","").toUpperCase().startsWith("SECOND_100000")}' and, in the checkout handler, 'if(t.some(e=>this.is_sold_out_tier_value(e.tier))){alert("Sold out tier cannot be purchased.");return}'. In the same file 'THIRD_' resolves to 'Full Service', so 'SECOND_' is the second paid tier, Peace of Mind - the one https://divly.com/en/pricing still advertises at EUR 699 for the 'Up to 100,000' bracket. Whether the server also refuses the sale is unestablished; what is established is that Divly's own client blocks it. (5) THE 'lifetime access ... forever' PROMISE YOU ARE RELYING ON lives in a help article, not the contract; the contract is stamped 'Updated by Synch: 22 September 2021', never mentions it, and reserves account deletion. (6) IF YOU ARE GERMAN, THE STALE PAGE IS THE MARKETING ONE, NOT THE PRODUCT. https://divly.com/en/guides/crypto-taxes-in-germany ('Jan. 15, 2026') still says 'You have a €600 exemption limit on crypto profits.' while the help article ('July 7, 2026') says 'If you exceed the €1000 exemption limit (€600 for tax years 2023 and earlier), the full amount of gains is taxable.' The app itself renders the correct figure - the German tax widget in plugin_v23.js computes the exemption as 'C(a.year>=2024?1e3:600)'. So the number you FILE is right; the number you'd PLAN with off the guide is two years stale.LedgibleScore 62A US-only IRS Form 8949 generator (Verady, Inc.) whose consumer tier is alive and current for tax year 2025, but whose public site has pivoted to institutional 1099-DA reporting and whose tax help centre has gone dark on the one US rule that changed the answer — Rev. Proc. 2024-28 is not mentioned once in 277 knowledge-base articles, even though Ledgible's own institutional whitepaper explains it.Strength: Portable record and prior year access — 6/10Watch-out: The $49 is a lifetime-transaction toll, not a this-year toll, and the caps that decide your bill are published only inside a PNG. Ledgible's own words: "Pricing is based on the total number of transactions you've made from the beginning of your transaction history to the end of the current tax year date (rather than annual transactions)" (support.ledgible.io/hc/en-us/articles/4405478844045, updated 2026-08-09). A filer with eight years of history and four trades this year is priced on all eight years. The base tier is also far narrower than the pricing page admits — "The basic package starts at $49 and includes up to 2 wallets and 1 exchange in their data sources with up to 200 transactions." (article 360058705432); that 2-wallet and 1-exchange limit appears NOWHERE on ledgible.io/pricing/, whose own base-tier image says only 'Tax-year reporting and up to 200 transactions'. (The pricing page does print '2 wallets', but inside an Enterprise Accounting usage example, not as the $49 cap — do not read it as the consumer limit.) Second, the buyer arriving from the marketing site will find the automation isn't there: the FAQ says "Yes, the Ledgible Platform offers full support for DeFi and NFT trading." while the documentation says "NFT tracking isn’t done automatically on Ledgible, so tracking the activity will be best done manually.", DeFi auto-categorisation covers only Ethereum and Algorand, and "However, income cannot be automatically detected and therefore transactions that are to be taxed as such must be designated by the user." — so every staking reward, airdrop and fork is hand-labelled. Third, and most expensive to discover late: this is a US-only filing artefact whose US rulebook is stale. Rev. Proc. 2024-28 wallet-level basis allocation is not mentioned once in 277 knowledge-base articles — while Ledgible's institutional whitepaper explains the rule in detail, so the silence is in the consumer product, not in the company. The FIFO/LIFO/HIFO guidance still cites the superseded IRS Virtual Currency FAQ Q39-41, and the preparer instructions still assert crypto is 'not currently reported on 1099s' in the first Form 1099-DA season.