If you want alternatives to Google Maps Platform for autocomplete, routing, and places search, the main options usually fall into three buckets:

1) Full map/location platforms

These are the closest “drop-in” style alternatives.

Mapbox

• Autocomplete / geocoding: Strong
• Routing/directions: Strong
• Places/search: Good, though not always as broad as Google in some regions/categories
• Pros: Great developer experience, good global coverage, flexible styling
• Cons: Pricing can rise with scale; place data may be less complete than Google in some use cases

HERE Technologies

• Autocomplete / geocoding: Strong
• Routing/directions: Very strong, especially for logistics/navigation
• Places/search: Good
• Pros: Enterprise-grade routing, traffic, fleet and logistics features
• Cons: API/console can feel more enterprise-oriented; integration can be heavier

TomTom

• Autocomplete / geocoding: Good
• Routing/directions: Strong
• Places/search: Good
• Pros: Solid navigation/routing, often competitive pricing
• Cons: Places/search may not match Google breadth in all markets

Esri

• Autocomplete / geocoding: Good
• Routing/directions: Strong
• Places/search: Good in GIS/enterprise contexts
• Pros: Excellent for GIS-heavy organizations
• Cons: Less ideal if you want simple consumer map UX

---

2) Open-data / self-hostable stack

If you want lower cost, more control, or to avoid vendor lock-in.

OpenStreetMap-based stack

Usually combined from multiple components:

• Autocomplete/geocoding:
  • Nominatim (OSM geocoder)
  • Pelias (more advanced geocoding/autocomplete)
• Routing:
  • OSRM
  • GraphHopper
  • Valhalla
• Places/search:
  • Usually built on OSM data plus your own search index or a provider like Pelias/Photon

Pros

• Low vendor lock-in
• Can self-host
• Flexible and cost-effective at scale

Cons

• More engineering/ops burden
• Place data quality can vary
• You may need to enrich data for business listings/POIs

This is a good path if you want to own the stack and are okay with infrastructure work.

---

3) Best-of-breed components

Instead of one provider for everything, combine services.

Examples:

• Autocomplete/geocoding: Mapbox / HERE / Pelias / Nominatim
• Routing: GraphHopper / OSRM / Valhalla / HERE
• Places search: Foursquare, Yelp, HERE, TomTom, or OSM-based indexes

This is useful if one provider is strong in routing but weaker in POI search, or if you want cheaper routing plus a better search layer.

---

Common place-search alternatives

If “places” is a big part of your needs, these are worth evaluating separately:

Foursquare

• Strong POI/place data and search
• Useful for discovery and venue/business search
• Often used as a data source rather than a full mapping platform

Yelp Fusion

• Strong for consumer-facing business search in some categories
• Great for reviews-oriented discovery
• Not a full maps platform

OpenStreetMap + custom index

• Good if you need broad geographic features and can build your own ranking/search logic

---

Quick recommendation by use case

If you want the closest Google-like all-in-one alternative:

• Mapbox or HERE

If you care most about routing/navigation:

• HERE, TomTom, or GraphHopper

If you care most about controlling cost and infrastructure:

• OSM + Pelias + OSRM/GraphHopper/Valhalla

If places/POI search is the hardest problem:

• Foursquare combined with a routing/geocoding provider

---

Things to compare before choosing

For each option, check:

• Autocomplete quality in your target countries
• POI coverage and freshness
• Routing quality: traffic, truck/EV support, avoidances, transit, walking, cycling
• Rate limits and pricing
• Licensing/data rights
• Self-hosting availability
• SDKs and ease of migration
• Latency and global performance

If you want, I can also give you a side-by-side comparison table of the top 5 options for autocomplete, routing, and places search.