A comparison between different alternative divertor configurations, in terms of benefits and additional complexity is carried out for the European DEMO. A synergetic approach between different aspects of the problem, including physics and engineering, provides new insight on the capabilities of the new divertors to handle the exhausted power without compromising performance or machine design. Five different configurations are examined and compared with the baseline single null. It is found that the X-divertor and the Super-X provide some margin in terms of physics, tied with their longer connection length. For example, for the same amount of impurity concentration, these two configurations allow an upstream separatrix density 50% lower than the single null. Double null and Snowflaxe minus configurations, on the other hand, did not show significant improvement with respect to the single null. Engineering difficulties, however, make the applicability of the alternative configurations difficult for reactors. Improvements in the toroidal field coil design can be achieved with more D-shaped designs and with more rigid intercoil structures. Active control of plasma displacements requires unacceptable levels of power if performed with only external coils but become manageable if internal coils are employed. Neutronics studies do not show major differences between the different configurations. Finally, a hybrid single null/super-X design is proposed as a compromise between the potentially improved physics and the engineering complexity.