Organizations looking for an Eligo alternative are usually not dissatisfied with digital voting itself: they are looking for more predictable costs, easier scaling, and greater flexibility over time.
Eligo is a well-established and secure online voting solution, particularly strong in formal and process-heavy environments. However, when organizations run elections only once every year or two or want clearer pricing and faster execution without coordination overhead, Eligo can reach its limits.
This article explains where Eligo performs well, where organizations start looking for alternatives, and why NemoVote is often chosen as the more flexible and cost-efficient option, without compromising security or reliability.
Let’s dive in.
Looking for more comparisons? See how NemoVote performs against ElectionBuddy, Simply Voting and POLYAS.
Eligo is one of the more established players in the European online voting market and is especially known in Italy.
Its platform supports online, hybrid, and on-site voting, offers advanced cryptographic protections, and provides many optional add-on modules, such as:
Eligo positions itself as a comprehensive, highly configurable solution for structurally complex organizations: federations, professional associations, companies, and unions.
However, several limitations become clear for many teams:
Eligo remains strong for compliance-heavy institutions, but many organizations seek a simpler, faster, more intuitive voting experience.
That is exactly where NemoVote stands out.
Both NemoVote and Eligo offer modern, well-designed interfaces that are easy to understand for administrators and voters alike. Eligo provides a structured and professional user experience, especially suited for organizations familiar with formal voting processes.
NemoVote is also designed to be intuitive and accessible, allowing administrators to create and manage elections quickly without technical expertise. Typical actions include:
For voters, both platforms work smoothly across devices such as smartphones, laptops, tablets, and desktop browsers, without requiring apps or plugins.
However, feature availability plays an important role in the practical user experience for administrators. In Eligo’s Light plan, several workflow-critical features are not included by default, including event duplication, automatic opening of elections, and automated reminders. These functions are essential for reducing manual effort, especially for associations running elections over a period of time and live votings, which need ad-hoc changes, such as general assemblies. When they are plan-restricted, administrators may need additional coordination or upgrades to achieve the same level of efficiency.
NemoVote includes these features as standard, which simplifies recurring election workflows and reduces administrative overhead.
In our comparison, NemoVote scores 4.8/5 for user-friendliness, while Eligo scores 4.7/5, confirming that both platforms deliver a strong user experience.
User experience alone is rarely the decisive factor when associations choose an online voting platform. In practice, price structure and long-term cost predictability play a much larger role: especially for organizations that conduct elections every year or multiple times per year.
Both Eligo and NemoVote provide modern, intuitive interfaces. The key difference lies in how pricing scales over time and how much flexibility organizations retain after the election ends.
Many voting platforms appear affordable at first, until essential features require upgrades or additional coordination. This is especially relevant for Eligo, where the base price often covers only part of what organizations need.
Eligo offers three plans, but full functionality is typically available only in higher tiers.
This plan is mainly a test environment, not suitable for running a real election.
Starts at €720/year and increases depending on voter count:
| €720/year | 1–50 voters |
| €1.536/year | 51–100 voters |
| €1.752/year | 101–150 voters |
| €1.956/year | 151–200 voters |
Included: participation status, observer access, theme customization
Not included: event duplication, automatic opening, automated reminders, voting receipts: features that are core to many real elections.
| Pricing | Custom quote |
| Voter limit | On request |
| Features | Depends on configuration |
| Election duration | Depends on contract |
Eligo does not offer true one-time events, which can be a limitation for organizations holding general assemblies or elections only once every one or two years.
NemoVote keeps things simple. All essential features: security, accessibility, real-time tools, and unlimited elections during the subscription, are included by default.
| Subscription model (unlimited elections) | Event model (one-time elections) |
| €378/year for 50 voters | €99/event for 50 voters |
| €486/year for 100 voters | €129/event for 100 voters |
| €594/year for 150 voters | €159/event for 150 voters |
| €702/year for 200 voters | €189/event for 200 voters |
Ideal for teams running several elections per year:
You get permanent access, data storage, full branding options, and no limitations.
Perfect for annual assemblies or single elections:
Includes full functionality, setup access 3 days before and after the election, and all basic voting features.
In our price-performance comparison, NemoVote scores 4/5, while Eligo scores 2/5 due to plan-dependent features and custom pricing.
Modern organizations do not just vote once per year. They need dynamic, real-time decision-making, and NemoVote was built for this.
NemoVote enables real-time governance
Eligo also supports structured processes, but its configuration is more oriented toward formal, multi-step environments.
For quick, flexible decision-making, NemoVote provides a much smoother workflow, reducing admin time and simplifying participation.
Both NemoVote and Eligo offer a high level of security and data protection. The difference lies less in whether they are secure, and more in how security is implemented and accessed.
In our comparison, both NemoVote and Eligo score 4/5 for security, with Eligo emphasizing cryptographic depth and NemoVote focusing on strong enterprise security without added complexity.
NemoVote focuses on delivering strong, enterprise-grade security by default, without adding operational complexity for administrators.
Key security features include:
This setup makes NemoVote suitable for organizations that need reliable protection for sensitive votes, while keeping setup and operation simple.
Eligo places a very strong emphasis on cryptographic and procedural security.
Eligo offers:
Both platforms meet high security standards and GDPR requirements.
Eligo may be the better fit for organizations that prioritize maximum cryptographic depth and formalized security processes, while NemoVote delivers full enterprise security in a more accessible and operationally lightweight way.
Hybrid and remote voting are no longer optional: they are essential.
Organizations report that remote voters join NemoVote events in under 10 seconds.
Eligo also supports hybrid events and offers direct integrations with tools like Microsoft Teams and Zoom, as well as QR-based accreditation for on-site participation. This provides strong hybrid capabilities but often requires more configuration.
This offers detailed control and makes the voting process overall more immersive, but increases setup time.
For fast, simple hybrid voting, NemoVote provides the smoother experience.
NemoVote is used by organizations in 32 countries, including:
The platform works equally well for different organizational structures, including small associations, large federations, clubs, academic institutions, charities, and youth groups. Its flexibility and intuitive setup make it accessible for both first-time election organizers and experienced administrators managing complex voting scenarios.
Eligo, on the other hand, is primarily used in Italy, especially by customer groups such as professional orders, cooperatives, municipalities, and religious organizations. It is well established in its local market and supports formal decision-making processes, but is less internationally widespread compared to NemoVote.
| Eligo may be a suitable choice if… | NemoVote may be the better choice if… |
| Your organization is large or highly institutionalized and prefers structured, process-driven election workflows | You are looking for a modern, intuitive platform that is easy to use for both administrators and voters |
| Your voting procedures involve multiple formal steps, approvals, or legally formalized coordination | You value transparent and predictable pricing, especially over multiple election cycles |
| You are comfortable working with custom quotes, tailored configurations, and longer setup cycles | You need fast setup, remote participation, and real-time results |
| Eligo appears particularly well suited for large organizations with formal governance structures that prioritize procedural depth and detailed configuration | For many organizations, especially small to mid-sized associations, federations, councils, and recurring election bodies, NemoVote offers a well-balanced combination of usability, flexibility, security, and pricing |
Modern organizations need simplicity, reliability, and transparency.
NemoVote delivers all three:
If your organization wants secure, GDPR-compliant voting without heavy bureaucracy, NemoVote is the superior choice.
Start a free test election in NemoVote.