Skip to content
SlateIndex
LoopioAI RFP Software Built for the People Behind Every RFP
vs
QwilrHelp your worst rep send your best proposals.
Comparison · Proposals & Contracts · weekly run Nov 2

Loopio 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 6 for Loopio, and ranks ahead in 89% of the answers that name both.

Choose Loopio if…

  • You need GDPR compliant or CCPA compliant coverage
  • You prefer a larger, established vendor (201–500 employees)
  • Flat tiers pricing suits your budget better than per seat
  • Centralized reusable content management for RFPs

Choose Qwilr if…

  • You want the brand AI engines rank higher (28.3 vs 6)
  • AI answers describe it more positively (51% vs 46% positive)
  • You need PCI-DSS coverage
  • Per seat pricing suits your budget better than flat tiers

AI visibility side by side

Latest weekly run · Nov 2

Metric Loopio Qwilr
Visibility score6%28.3%
Change vs last weekNewNew
Rank in Proposals & Contracts#15#4
Share of voice2.2%7.2%
Mentions this run1237
Positive in AI answers46%51%

The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.

Visibility score trend

Weekly runs over the last 60 days

0%25%50%75%100%Nov 2Loopio 6%

Loopio 0pp · Qwilr 0pp over 0 weekly runs.

Engine by engine

Qwilr leads on 3 of 3 engines

ChatGPT
2.6%
30.2%
AI Mode
6.7%
26.9%
Perplexity
8.9%
27.8%
LoopioQwilr

Head to head in AI answers

9 engine answers name both brands

1Loopio ranked higher
8Qwilr ranked higher

Features, pricing & fit

DimensionLoopioQwilr
Pricing modelFlat tiersPer seat
Entry priceContact sales$35 per seat / mo
Free planNoNo · 14-day trial
DeploymentCloud-delivered, hosted on Amazon Web ServicesWeb-based, web-native software
ComplianceSOC 2 Type II, GDPR compliant, CCPA compliantSOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS
SupportOnboarding Manager training and setup, Ongoing Customer Success guidance, On-demand learning hub, Phone, email and in-app supportEmail support, Help center, Chat support, Training sessions
Founded20142014
HeadquartersToronto, CanadaRedfern, New South Wales, Australia
Employees201–50051–200
FundingStrategic investment from Sumeru Equity PartnersSeries A (AirTree Ventures) · $9M raised
Best forProposal and bid managers, sales teams, pre-sales, IT and InfoSec, investor relations and marketing teams that answer RFPs, DDQs and security questionnaires.Sales teams that send proposals, quotes and contracts and want to track buyer engagement.

Plans side by side

Loopio

FoundationsCustom
EnhancedCustom
EnterpriseCustom
Loopio pricing

Qwilr

Starter$35user/month, billed annually ($49 monthly)
Growth$55user/month, annual only, min 5 users
Scale$75user/month, annual only, min 10 users
Qwilr pricing

Pros and cons

Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand

Loopio

  • Centralized reusable content management for RFPs
  • Strong for high-volume RFP and security questionnaire responses
  • Recognized as a leading enterprise RFP response tool

    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, “Loopio vs Qwilr”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/loopio-vs-qwilr, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.