Conga CLM vs Qwilr
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Qwilr is the stronger AI pick in Proposals & Contracts: it has a visibility score of 28.3 versus 7.3 for Conga CLM, and ranks ahead in 100% of the answers that name both.
Choose Conga CLM if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (67% vs 51% positive)
- You need ISO 27001 or ISO 27701 or HIPAA or EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (1,001–5,000 employees)
- Enterprise-grade document generation, CPQ, and contract lifecycle management
Choose Qwilr if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (28.3 vs 7.3)
- You need PCI-DSS coverage
- Interactive, web-based proposals
- Polished, visually striking proposal presentation
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 2
| Metric | Conga CLM | Qwilr |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 7.3% | 28.3% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in Proposals & Contracts | #13 | #4 |
| Share of voice | 2.5% | 7.2% |
| Mentions this run | 13 | 37 |
| Positive in AI answers | 67% | 51% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Conga CLM 0pp · Qwilr 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Qwilr leads on 3 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
6 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | Conga CLM | Qwilr |
|---|---|---|---|
| What are the best Proposals & Contracts tools in 2026? | AI Mode | #9 | #2 |
| Top proposal and contract tool options for B2B SaaS companies | Perplexity | #10 | #3 |
| Compare the leading Proposals & Contracts platforms | ChatGPT | #10 | #3 |
| Which Proposals & Contracts vendors do analysts recommend? | Perplexity | #8 | #6 |
| Official website of the top proposal and contract tool vendors | ChatGPT | #13 | #3 |
| Official website of the top proposal and contract tool vendors | Perplexity | #8 | #3 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Conga CLM | Qwilr |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | — | Per seat |
| Entry price | — | $35 per seat / mo |
| Free plan | — | No · 14-day trial |
| Deployment | Flexible deployment options | Web-based, web-native software |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 27701, HIPAA, EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework | SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS |
| Support | — | Email support, Help center, Chat support, Training sessions |
| Founded | 2006 | 2014 |
| Headquarters | Houston, Texas, United States | Redfern, New South Wales, Australia |
| Employees | 1,001–5,000 | 51–200 |
| Funding | Venture round led by Insight Venture Partners and Salesforce Ventures | Series A (AirTree Ventures) · $9M raised |
| Best for | Large enterprises and high-growth businesses whose commercial complexity across sales, legal, finance and IT is high. | Sales teams that send proposals, quotes and contracts and want to track buyer engagement. |
Plans side by side
Conga CLM
Pricing not available.
Qwilr
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Conga CLM
- Enterprise-grade document generation, CPQ, and contract lifecycle management
- Deep integration with CRM ecosystems and Salesforce
- Suited to complex sales cycles and complex, multi-layered agreement workflows
- Stronger choice for broader contract and agreement management
- Proposal generation integrated with broader CRM and document workflows
Qwilr
- Interactive, web-based proposals
- Polished, visually striking proposal presentation
- Frequently shortlisted and highly rated among proposal tools
- Lower cost with annual billing
- 14-day free trial available
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Conga CLM vs Qwilr”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/conga-clm-vs-qwilr, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.