Amenitiz review: the numbers behind Southern Europe's fastest-growing PMS

I’ll tell you what I did before I looked at a single feature. I went to the Amenitiz website and checked the pricing page. It was there. Published. Three tiers, three numbers, no asterisks, no “contact us for a quote.” €39/month, €59/month, €69/month. Zero commission on bookings. I could calculate the annual cost of this PMS in my head before I’d even created an account. That’s unusual enough in hotel software to be worth writing about on its own.

I praised that transparency. Then I read the contract terms more carefully, and I need to walk some of that praise back. More on that shortly.

Amenitiz is a Barcelona-based PMS that has grown from about 4,000 properties to over 15,000 since 2022. They raised $45M in a Series B in November 2025 and have processed around €3 billion in bookings. The growth is concentrated in Southern Europe: Spain, France, Italy, Portugal. The product bundles a PMS, booking engine, website builder, payment processing, and basic revenue management into a single platform. It’s designed for small independents, the kind of property where the owner might be upgrading from a spreadsheet and a handwritten reservation book.

I’m reviewing Amenitiz as part of our property management overview, and I’ll be comparing it to Cloudbeds, which I’m also reviewing in this category. The comparison matters because both target independent hotels with an all-in-one pitch, but they come at it from very different directions and very different price points.

Starting with the number that matters

Let me do what I always do and work out what this actually costs.

Amenitiz runs three tiers. The Starter plan at €39/month gives you the PMS core, a booking engine, and a basic website. The Pro plan at €59/month adds integrated payments, a channel manager, and more automation. The top tier at €69/month includes revenue management tools and additional reporting. All tiers quote monthly prices. No commission on direct bookings at any level.

For my 80-room hotel in Amsterdam, the annual cost at the Pro tier (which is realistically the minimum for a property connecting to OTAs) would be €708/year. At the top tier with revenue management, €828/year. Let me write that again, because I keep checking it: eight hundred and twenty-eight euros for a full year of PMS software including a channel manager, booking engine, payments, and revenue management.

I built a comparison spreadsheet. At my 80-room property, a mid-market PMS like Mews starts around €3,600/year (and Anna noted the two-year contract requirement). RoomRaccoon is approximately €2,400/year for a 30-room property, so extrapolating to 80 rooms puts it well above Amenitiz. Cloudbeds starts around $1,200/year and scales with room count and feature tier; for a property my size with the features I’d need, the annual cost is multiples of what Amenitiz charges. The price difference is not marginal. Amenitiz is a fraction of what its competitors cost.

So the question becomes obvious: what don’t you get?

The contract fine print

This is where I have to correct myself, and it irritates me.

The pricing page shows monthly figures: €39, €59, €69. It looks like monthly billing. Multiple hoteliers I’ve spoken to signed up expecting exactly that. What they discovered was a 12-month commitment. No free trial period either. You see published prices (good), you feel reassured (understandable), and then you’re locked in for a year before you’ve had a chance to properly evaluate the product in a live environment.

I find this particularly frustrating because Amenitiz’s marketing leans hard on transparency and simplicity. “No hidden costs” is part of the pitch. But a 12-month lock-in is a cost, even if it isn’t denominated in euros. For a small property owner testing their first PMS, being unable to walk away for twelve months after a week of realising the product isn’t right is a real problem. A one-month trial, or even a three-month initial term, would make the transparent pricing story honest rather than just half-true.

To be fair, Mews requires a two-year contract, which is worse. But Mews doesn’t build its entire brand around pricing simplicity. Amenitiz does. When your main selling point is “we’re the honest ones,” the fine print matters more, not less.

And the pricing page isn’t the complete picture. I’ve heard from hoteliers who discovered additional charges for features they assumed were included at their tier, and payment processing fees that weren’t mentioned upfront. I can’t verify every claim, but the pattern is consistent enough to mention. If you’re evaluating Amenitiz, read the full contract. Ask specifically about what costs extra beyond the published tier price. The headline numbers are real, but they may not be the only numbers.

What’s in the box at each tier

I signed up for the Pro tier and tested the system against my Amsterdam property’s operations for three weeks. Not a full migration. I ran it in parallel, entering a subset of real bookings to see how the daily workflow held up.

The PMS core handles what you’d expect: reservations, guest profiles, room assignments, check-in and check-out. The calendar view is clean and readable. Creating a reservation takes a few clicks. The interface is clearly designed for someone who isn’t a power user, and it shows in both the good and the bad sense. Good: there’s very little to learn. My front desk manager looked at it for ten minutes and said she understood how it worked. Bad: when I needed to do something slightly outside the standard workflow (split billing for a corporate group, applying a rate adjustment to fourteen rooms at once), the system either couldn’t do it or required a workaround that took longer than it should.

The booking engine is functional and, for small properties, it’s one of the strongest parts of the package. It produces a clean booking page that I could embed on our existing website. Several hoteliers I’ve spoken to said the booking engine drove a measurable uplift in direct bookings after they switched from having no online booking option at all. That’s a real win for a 15-room B&B that was previously sending guests to Booking.com by default. Conversion tracking is basic, though. I could see how many bookings came through, but I couldn’t trace the guest journey in any meaningful way. No attribution to marketing channels, no A/B testing, no way to measure whether one rate presentation converts better than another. For an 80-room city hotel that spends actual money on marketing, I need to know where my bookings come from.

The channel manager connects to the major OTAs. Availability synced correctly during my three-week test. I didn’t experience overbookings or rate parity issues myself, though three weeks isn’t long enough to be definitive about reliability. I’ll come back to this, because a colleague had a very different experience.

The website builder is the feature I spent the least time on, because it’s the feature that matters least to me. If you’re a small B&B or guesthouse without a website, Amenitiz will give you one from a template. It looks professional enough, though the templates produce fairly generic results. Several people I’ve spoken to described their Amenitiz-built sites as looking interchangeable with other properties on the platform. But I already have a website. I already have a web agency. I already have a CMS. A template website builder is not a value proposition for an established property; it’s a feature designed for someone starting from zero. I’d estimate 80% of properties over 40 rooms already have a website they’re not going to replace.

The rate sync problem I can’t ignore

During my own three-week test, the channel manager worked fine. But I need to tell you what happened to someone else.

A colleague who runs a small hotel in Southern Europe (I won’t name him or his property) told me about rate discrepancies between Amenitiz and his OTA connections. Rates he’d set in the system were not correctly reflected on the OTA side. He didn’t catch it immediately. By the time he did, the incorrect rates had been live long enough to cost him over €2,000 in bookings honoured at the wrong price.

Two thousand euros. On a property with margins that are already thin. That’s not a bug report you file and forget about. That’s a month’s profit gone because the channel manager displayed a rate you didn’t set.

I can’t tell you how common this is. My own test didn’t surface it. But when I asked around, he wasn’t the only one who’d experienced sync issues. The financial risk here is real and it’s asymmetric: the PMS costs €59/month, but a single rate sync error can cost you multiples of the annual subscription. For a product whose core promise is “everything works together in one place,” the channel manager needs to be bulletproof. Based on what I’ve heard, it isn’t always.

The revenue management question

This is where I spent the most time with my spreadsheet open.

Amenitiz’s top tier includes what they call revenue management. I tested it. The tool suggests rate adjustments based on occupancy levels, day of week, and seasonal patterns. It does not, as far as I could determine, pull in competitor pricing, market demand data, or event calendars. It does not account for booking pace or pick-up patterns. It does not do segmented pricing. It is, to be direct, a rule-based pricing tool that sits on top of your own occupancy data.

For a 20-room hotel in a Portuguese beach town with a predictable high season and low season, this is probably enough. You set your base rates, the system nudges them up when you’re filling and down when you’re not, and you’re doing better than the owner who charges the same rate year-round.

For my 80-room hotel in Amsterdam, where I’m competing with hundreds of properties, where there are major events (King’s Day, Pride, conventions, trade fairs) that create demand spikes I need to anticipate weeks in advance, where corporate rates coexist with OTA rates and direct rates and group rates, where I need to understand my RevPAR index against my comp set; this tool is not enough. It’s not close to enough. I currently use a dedicated revenue management system alongside my PMS, and Amenitiz’s built-in tool would not replace even half of what it does.

I ran the numbers. During my three-week test, Amenitiz’s rate suggestions would have left approximately €4–7 per available room per night on the table compared to what my current revenue management setup achieved. On 80 rooms over a year, even at a conservative 70% occupancy, that’s somewhere between €80,000 and €140,000 in foregone revenue. The annual saving on Amenitiz versus my current PMS might be €3,000. The revenue I’d lose by downgrading my rate optimisation would be twenty to forty times that.

This isn’t a criticism of Amenitiz. It’s a statement about fit. The revenue management is built for properties where any dynamic pricing is an improvement over none. At my scale, the cost of basic revenue management is greater than the cost of better software.

The mobile app reality

I initially tested Amenitiz on my phone and the browser-based experience was reasonable for basic tasks. Checking today’s arrivals, glancing at the calendar. Fine.

But the dedicated mobile app is a different story. The further I got into testing, the more the app’s limitations became clear. Tasks that worked smoothly on desktop either didn’t work in the app or required switching to a browser. Editing reservations, running reports, managing rate plans: these are things I expected to do on my phone, and the app didn’t reliably support them.

I’ve heard the same from other users. The mobile app is described as barely functional by some, and the gap between the desktop experience and the mobile app experience is wider than you’d expect from a product that markets itself as modern and cloud-native. For a property owner who needs to manage operations from a phone (and that’s most of Amenitiz’s target market), this is a significant gap. You’ll end up opening the browser on your phone instead, which works but defeats the purpose of having an app.

Testing a real scenario: a corporate group booking

Here’s the specific test that told me the most.

I simulated a booking we handle regularly: a corporate client reserving twelve rooms for three nights, with a negotiated rate, split billing (company pays room, guest pays incidentals), and a requirement for a pro-forma invoice before arrival. This is bread-and-butter business for a city hotel.

The reservation itself was fine. I could create a group booking, assign rooms, apply a custom rate. Where it fell apart was the billing. Amenitiz doesn’t support split folios in the way I need. I couldn’t assign room charges to the corporate invoice and minibar charges to the guest’s personal card within a single stay. The workaround involved creating two separate profiles per guest, one linked to the corporate account and one personal, and manually allocating charges. For twelve rooms, that’s twenty-four profiles and a lot of manual work that my current PMS handles automatically.

The pro-forma invoice was another friction point. The invoicing module is designed for straightforward stays: one guest, one rate, one invoice. Corporate billing with VAT breakdowns, purchase order references, and advance invoicing requires workarounds that feel like you’re pushing against the system’s assumptions.

Again, this is a fit question. A 15-room rural guesthouse in Andalusia doesn’t handle corporate group bookings. Amenitiz wasn’t built for this scenario, and it shows.

What Amenitiz gets right

I’ve been hard on the contract terms and the channel manager, so let me be clear about what works.

The ease of use is real. This isn’t marketing fluff. The system is simple to learn, simple to operate, and fast to get running. My front desk manager understood the interface in ten minutes. Onboarding took a day. Compare that to the Mews migration Anna described, which took the better part of two weeks. For a small property switching from paper or spreadsheets, the speed of going live matters more than the depth of configuration options. Amenitiz prioritises the former and it’s the right call for their market.

The booking engine drives real results for small properties. I keep hearing this from hoteliers who previously had no direct booking capability. If you’re a 15-room guesthouse and every booking used to come through an OTA at 15–18% commission, adding a direct booking channel that actually works is worth more than most features a PMS can offer. The zero-commission model on bookings reinforces this. Some competitors charge a percentage on bookings processed through their booking engine. Amenitiz doesn’t. For a small hotel doing 500 direct bookings a year at an average of €150, even a 2% commission would be €1,500. With Amenitiz, that’s zero.

The published pricing, contract issues aside, is still better than most of the category. I can see the numbers before I talk to anyone. Not Mews, not Cloudbeds, not Apaleo. Thomas can tell you about Apaleo’s quote-based pricing; I’ll just note that Amenitiz is one of very few PMS vendors where I didn’t need a sales call to know the ballpark of what I’d pay. I wish the transparency extended to the contract length and the additional fees, but the starting point is still ahead of the industry norm.

And the growth trajectory matters. Nearly 4x growth from 4,000 to 15,000 properties in three years, a $45M Series B, and €3 billion in processed bookings. That’s not a company at risk of vanishing. When I’m evaluating budget software, the first thing I check is whether the company will still exist in two years. Amenitiz passes that test comfortably.

Support: a mixed bag

I had a functional experience with Amenitiz’s support during my testing. Responses came within a reasonable timeframe, and the answers were adequate. But I’ve heard enough mixed reports to flag it.

Some hoteliers described support as quick and helpful. Others told me about slow responses, unhelpful answers, and the frustration of being locked into a 12-month contract while waiting days for a reply about a system issue. The inconsistency is the problem. When you’re running a small property without an IT department, and a guest is standing at reception while something isn’t working, “we’ll get back to you” isn’t good enough. Support quality at budget price points is always a gamble, and I can’t tell you which experience you’ll get.

Where it falls short for a property like mine

The limitations I found cluster around a theme: Amenitiz is built for properties that are simpler than mine.

Reporting is basic. I could pull occupancy reports, revenue summaries, and booking source breakdowns. I could not build custom reports, export granular data for my own analysis, or create the kind of dashboards I maintain in my spreadsheets. The reporting answers “what happened” but not “why” or “what should I do about it.” For revenue attribution (which I consider a dealbreaker), the tools don’t go deep enough. I need to know my cost of acquisition per channel, my net revenue per booking source, my ADR trend by segment. Amenitiz gives me totals and averages.

Integration options are limited compared to the mid-market PMS platforms. Amenitiz has built a lot into the core product, which reduces the need for third-party connections. But when you do need an external tool (a proper revenue management system, a CRM, a business intelligence platform), the integration ecosystem is smaller. I counted the available connections. It’s a fraction of what Mews offers through its marketplace.

Multi-property support exists but feels like an afterthought. I run one hotel, so this doesn’t affect me directly. But I spoke to a colleague at FITUR who manages three small properties in the south of France and tried Amenitiz across all of them. Her feedback was that the multi-property view is basic and that consolidating reporting across properties required manual work.

The target market is narrow by design. Amenitiz focuses on Southern Europe, and the product reflects that. Tax configurations, legal requirements, and localisation are strongest for Spain, France, Italy, and Portugal. The Netherlands is supported, but I noticed that some of the automated guest communication templates defaulted to French rather than Dutch, and the Dutch translations felt machine-generated. A minor issue, but it reinforced the sense that my market isn’t Amenitiz’s priority.

The “all-in-one” pitch also has a ceiling. For properties under 20 rooms, bundling everything together is a strength. You don’t have to evaluate five separate vendors. But once a property grows past that point, the bundled tools start to feel like compromises rather than conveniences. The channel manager has had sync issues for some users. The revenue management is rule-based only. The website builder produces generic results. The reporting is surface-level. Each individual limitation is understandable at the price point. Together, they define a product that works best when you don’t ask too much of it.

The Cloudbeds comparison

I’m reviewing both Amenitiz and Cloudbeds for this category, so the comparison is inevitable.

Cloudbeds is an American company backed by $245M in funding, including SoftBank money. It targets independents globally with an all-in-one pitch that sounds similar to Amenitiz’s. But the implementation is very different.

Cloudbeds costs multiples of what Amenitiz charges. The starting price is around $100/month, but by the time you add the features a property my size needs, the annual cost is several thousand dollars. In exchange, you get a deeper feature set: more sophisticated revenue management, a larger integration marketplace, better reporting, stronger multi-property support, and a broader geographical reach.

The pricing philosophy is different too. Cloudbeds requires a sales conversation for specific pricing. Amenitiz publishes headline numbers, which is better, even if those headlines don’t tell the full story. For a cost-conscious operator (and I am always a cost-conscious operator), I still prefer seeing a number on a website over being told to “request a demo.” I should not have to talk to a sales representative to find out how much software costs. This is 2026. Put the number on the website.

But features-for-price is a more complicated comparison. If I’m running a 15-room guesthouse, Amenitiz gives me 90% of what I need at a fifth of the price. If I’m running an 80-room city hotel, Cloudbeds gives me capabilities I can’t get from Amenitiz at any tier, and the price difference is justified by measurable revenue improvements. The right choice depends entirely on the property.

What I’ll say in my Cloudbeds review, and what I’ll say here too: the PMS market has room for both approaches. The mistake is thinking they compete directly. Amenitiz is for properties growing out of spreadsheets. Cloudbeds is for properties growing into operational complexity. The overlap is smaller than either company’s marketing suggests.

Who should use Amenitiz

I can describe the ideal Amenitiz customer with some precision, because the product makes its target market obvious.

You run an independent property with 10–20 rooms. You’re in Spain, France, Italy, or Portugal. You’re currently managing reservations with a combination of spreadsheets, paper, a basic booking system, or possibly nothing at all. You want a proper PMS but you’ve looked at the prices of mid-market options and felt your stomach drop. You don’t have a revenue manager. You don’t have complex corporate billing. You don’t need 600 integrations. You need a system that works, that you can afford, and that you can learn in a day.

If that’s you, Amenitiz is one of the best options available. The price-to-value ratio at this scale is hard to beat. You get a real PMS, a real booking engine, a real channel manager, and a real website if you need one. For under €70/month. No commission. The economics are simple.

Go in with your eyes open, though. Read the contract terms before you sign. Understand that you’re committing for twelve months. Ask explicitly about any costs beyond the published tier price. Check that the mobile app does what you need it to do (test it on your phone before you commit, not after). And if you’re connecting to OTAs, monitor your rates closely for the first few weeks to make sure the channel manager is syncing correctly. These aren’t reasons to avoid Amenitiz. They’re reasons to be careful, which is advice I’d give about any PMS.

But if that’s not you, the calculus shifts quickly.

At 50 rooms, you’ll start feeling the reporting limitations. At 80 rooms, like mine, the revenue management gap becomes expensive. The corporate billing workflow doesn’t scale. The integration ecosystem starts to constrain your choices. The product that felt generous at 15 rooms starts to feel thin at 50, and restrictive at 80.

I asked a few hoteliers I know about Amenitiz at HITEC and the Independent Hotel Show. The feedback was consistent: people who run small properties in Mediterranean markets love it. People who run larger properties either hadn’t heard of it or had looked at it and moved on. That’s not a failure. That’s a product with a clear identity.

What I’d tell a colleague

If a colleague running a 20-room hotel in Lisbon asked me about Amenitiz, I’d tell them it’s worth serious consideration, but to read every line of the contract first. The published pricing is a good starting point. The product is easy to learn and fast to set up. The booking engine will probably earn its keep in direct bookings within the first few months. Just know what you’re signing up for: twelve months, and possibly some costs that aren’t on the pricing page.

If a colleague running a property like mine asked, I’d tell them to look elsewhere. Not because Amenitiz is bad, but because it’s built for someone else. The features I need at my scale (deep revenue management, flexible billing, rich reporting, extensive integrations) aren’t here, and the money I’d save on the PMS subscription would be dwarfed by the revenue I’d lose from less sophisticated rate management.

And I’d tell anyone, regardless of property size, to monitor their OTA rates carefully if they use the channel manager. The €2,000 loss my colleague described is the kind of thing that turns a budget-friendly PMS into an expensive mistake.

The transparent pricing is still better than most of the industry, even with the caveats I’ve described. The zero-commission structure is the right approach. The growth from 4,000 to 15,000 properties tells me the market agrees. But the gap between the marketing and the reality, particularly around contract flexibility and the mobile app, is wider than I’d like from a company that positions itself as the straightforward alternative.

I’m giving it a 6. I’d give it an 8 if I ran a 20-room property in Barcelona and could verify there were no hidden fees beyond the published price. The score reflects the product’s value for a hotel like mine, and I want to be honest about that limitation rather than pretending my needs are universal.

Sophie, for all six of us