Qvalia vs B2Brouter Peppol platform comparison
Choosing the right Peppol platform is essential for scalable, efficient, and compliant electronic invoicing and business messaging. While both Qvalia and B2Brouter support Peppol-based exchange, they differ in platform scope, API maturity, onboarding approach, pricing transparency, and operational model.
This comparison outlines the key differences between Qvalia and B2Brouter, based on publicly available documentation and vendor positioning, to help you assess which solution best fits your technical requirements and business context.
| Capability | Qvalia | B2Brouter |
| Positioning | Complete infrastructure with advanced data management | Peppol e-invoicing provider |
| Peppol Access Point | Yes | Yes |
| Supported Peppol documents (clearly stated) | Invoices, credit notes, ordering, catalogue, despatch, responses (full BIS scope) | Invoices and other documents via API and web portal (BIS scope) |
| Public API documentation | Yes, publicly available and developer-oriented | Yes, publicly available |
| API maturity | Advanced (API-first, self-service, multi-layer) | Intermediate (invoice-centric, self-service) |
| Web application | Yes, full-featured web application for creating, sending, receiving, and managing invoices, orders, and other business messages | Web portal for creating, sending, receiving e-invoices |
| B2B/B2G/G2G | Yes | Yes |
| SMP/Peppol ID management | Integrated SMP, API-driven Peppol ID management | Supported (certified AP + SMP) |
| Conversion (format transformation) | PDF→XML, XML→Peppol, structured normalization | Format compliance and validation |
| Validation (schema & business rules) | Full Peppol validation and compliance checks | API and portal validation |
| Technical monitoring | End-to-end lifecycle, retries, error handling | Real-time status via API |
| Audit & compliance | Full audit trail, ISO 27001 | ISO 27001 certified |
| Data enrichment layer | Classification, spend, carbon data, accounting automation | Not offered |
| Access to transaction data | Full access via APIs, exports, and UI | API access + web portal |
| Scalability & volume pricing | Volume-optimized, cost-efficient | Scalable for SMB to enterprise |
| Partner / platform use | Yes, API-first and white-label ready | Supported for integrations, partner model not clearly offered |
| Developer self-signup | Yes, online signup | Yes, online signup |
| Pricing transparency | Public plans | Free tier + defined options |
| Support & SLA | Support included in published pricing; enterprise SLAs available | Support not publicly listed, may incur costs |
| Time to go live | Minutes to days | Days to weeks |
| Onboarding experience | Self-service and assisted onboarding | Online signup and configuration |
| Customisation model | Configuration-driven via APIs | Standard API integration |
| Change management and upgrades | Continuous updates with backwards-compatible APIs | Portal + API updates |
| Typical customers | SMBs, large enterprises, platforms, and partners | SMBs to enterprises |
| Best fit | Enterprises to SMBs needing scalable, transparent, and data-rich Peppol infrastructure | Flexible Peppol access with API + web portal |
Comparison method and scope
This comparison is based on publicly available documentation, vendor websites, and stated product positioning at the time of writing. Capabilities described as “not publicly documented” or “not positioned as a standard capability” may still be available through enterprise agreements, custom projects, or private documentation.
Product features, certifications, and commercial terms may change over time. Buyers should verify specific requirements directly with each vendor as part of their evaluation.
Scope
This page focuses on comparing Qvalia with the vendor listed above, based on platform capabilities relevant to Peppol-based electronic business messaging. This includes areas such as APIs, onboarding, compliance, operational transparency, and typical usage models.
It does not attempt to evaluate commercial negotiations, bespoke enterprise agreements, or customer-specific implementations.
Neutrality
Both Qvalia and the vendor compared are established providers in the electronic invoicing and compliance ecosystem. The purpose of this comparison is to support informed decision-making by outlining differences in product positioning, documentation transparency, and typical use cases.
Terminology
Where terms such as “API maturity”, “not positioned”, or “limited documentation” are used on this page, they refer to the depth and accessibility of publicly available product or developer documentation. They do not imply the absence or quality of underlying technical capabilities.