LoomWe're bringing video messaging to work and empowering everyone to communicate more effectively, wherever they are.
vs
QwilrHelp your worst rep send your best proposals.
Comparison · Sales Enablement · weekly run Nov 2
Loom 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 Sales Enablement: it has a visibility score of 1.5 versus 1.1 for Loom.
Choose Loom if…
- You want a free plan to start
- You need GDPR or CCPA or SOC 2 Type 2 coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (5,000+ employees)
- Async video for sharing updates and feedback
Choose Qwilr if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (1.5 vs 1.1)
- You need SOC 2 Type II or PCI-DSS coverage
- Interactive, web-based proposals
- Polished, visually striking proposal presentation
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 2
| Metric | Loom | Qwilr |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 1.1% | 1.5% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in Sales Enablement | #32 | #28 |
| Share of voice | 0.4% | 0.3% |
| Mentions this run | 2 | 2 |
| Positive in AI answers | — | 51% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Loom 0pp · Qwilr 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Qwilr leads on 2 of 3 engines
ChatGPT
AI Mode
Perplexity
LoomQwilr
Head to head in AI answers
0 engine answers name both brands
0Loom ranked higher
0Qwilr ranked higher
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Loom | Qwilr |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per seat | Per seat |
| Entry price | Free; paid from $18 per seat / mo | $35 per seat / mo |
| Free plan | Yes | No · 14-day trial |
| Deployment | Cloud, built on AWS infrastructure | Web-based, web-native software |
| Compliance | GDPR, CCPA, SOC 2 Type 2 | SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS |
| Support | Priority support on Business and Business + AI plans, Dedicated support and a dedicated account manager on Enterprise | Email support, Help center, Chat support, Training sessions |
| Founded | 2016 | 2014 |
| Headquarters | San Francisco, California, United States | Redfern, New South Wales, Australia |
| Employees | 5,000+ | 51–200 |
| Funding | Series C · $204M raised | Series A (AirTree Ventures) · $9M raised |
| Best for | Sales, engineering, customer support and design teams that want to share context by video message instead of meetings or long emails. | Sales teams that send proposals, quotes and contracts and want to track buyer engagement. |
Plans side by side
Loom
Starter$0
Business$18per user / month
Business + AI$24per user / month
EnterpriseCustom
Qwilr
Starter$35user/month, billed annually ($49 monthly)
Growth$55user/month, annual only, min 5 users
Scale$75user/month, annual only, min 10 users
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Loom
- Async video for sharing updates and feedback
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, “Loom vs Qwilr”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/loom-vs-qwilr, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.