— vs sanity
Sanity has the strongest schema-as-code story in the market. Their Studio is customisable to a degree no competitor matches. The cost is San Francisco, US infrastructure, and no native compliance posture. Estøkad is built on the same engineering convictions and shifts the entire stack inside the EU jurisdiction perimeter.
| Criterion | Sanity | Estøkad |
|---|---|---|
| Headquarters | San Francisco (Oslo origin) | Brussels, Belgium |
| Data residency | US, EU regions | Per country: BE, FR, DE, NL, LU, CH |
| Cloud Act exposure | Yes — US-domiciled | No — EU jurisdiction end-to-end |
| DORA evidence pack | Not a product feature | Auto-generated, downloadable |
| Audit log | API access logs | Hash-chained, customer-verifiable |
| Schema as code | TypeScript, customisable Studio | TypeScript-first defineType() |
| Visual editing | Presentation tool (newer) | Storyblok-grade overlay |
| Studio extensibility | Custom inputs, plugins | Custom inputs, plus visual-edit-first |
| Query language | GROQ + GraphQL | GraphQL primary, REST secondary |
| Pricing | Free tier plus usage tiers | Platform fee plus à la carte modules |
Studio extensibility through custom input components and a plugin ecosystem. A more mature schema-builder community. GROQ as a query language for teams who already know it. Sanity is the right answer when jurisdiction does not enter the procurement conversation.
EU jurisdiction end-to-end. Data never leaves the country the customer chose. DORA evidence pack as a product feature, not a Confluence page assembled by hand. A visual editing overlay matching Storyblok's quality, not Sanity's newer Presentation tool.
Same engineering. European jurisdiction.
See pricing →