Skip to content
SlateIndex
QwilrHelp your worst rep send your best proposals.
vs
ResponsiveResponsive AI powers bids, questionnaires, and trust centers with insight, accuracy, and speed.
Comparison · Proposals & Contracts · weekly run Nov 2

Qwilr vs Responsive

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 10.7 for Responsive, and ranks ahead in 87% of the answers that name both.

Choose Qwilr if…

  • You want the brand AI engines rank higher (28.3 vs 10.7)
  • You want a lower entry price ($35 vs $10,000)
  • AI answers describe it more positively (51% vs 33% positive)
  • You need SOC 2 Type II or PCI-DSS coverage

Choose Responsive if…

  • You need GDPR or AICPA SOC 2 or ISO 27001 or ISO 27701 or ISO 42001 or CCPA or STAR Level 1 coverage
  • You prefer a larger, established vendor (501–1,000 employees)
  • Flat tiers pricing suits your budget better than per seat
  • Strong enterprise choice for high-volume RFPs

AI visibility side by side

Latest weekly run · Nov 2

Metric Qwilr Responsive
Visibility score28.3%10.7%
Change vs last weekNewNew
Rank in Proposals & Contracts#4#10
Share of voice7.2%4%
Mentions this run3720
Positive in AI answers51%33%

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 2Qwilr 28%

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

Engine by engine

Qwilr leads on 3 of 3 engines

ChatGPT
30.2%
3%
AI Mode
26.9%
15.7%
Perplexity
27.8%
13.3%
QwilrResponsive

Head to head in AI answers

15 engine answers name both brands

13Qwilr ranked higher
2Responsive ranked higher

Features, pricing & fit

DimensionQwilrResponsive
Pricing modelPer seatFlat tiers
Entry price$35 per seat / mo$10,000 / mo
Free planNo · 14-day trialNo
DeploymentWeb-based, web-native softwareFlexible hosting options
Integrations—32+
ComplianceSOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSSGDPR, AICPA SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 27701, ISO 42001, CCPA, STAR Level 1
SupportEmail support, Help center, Chat support, Training sessionsProfessional Services with APMP-certified experts for onboarding and training, Premium deployment and support on Growth and Enterprise editions
Founded20142015
HeadquartersRedfern, New South Wales, AustraliaFrisco, Texas, United States
Employees51–200501–1,000
FundingSeries A (AirTree Ventures) · $9M raisedRound led by Elevate Capital
Best forSales teams that send proposals, quotes and contracts and want to track buyer engagement.Dedicated proposal or operations teams with legal, InfoSec and compliance involvement, and global or multi-region operations.

Plans side by side

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

Responsive

Emerging Edition$10,000year (starting from, platform fee)
Growth EditionCustomyear
Enterprise EditionCustomyear
Responsive pricing

Pros and cons

Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand

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

    Responsive

    • Strong enterprise choice for high-volume RFPs
    • Designed for complex enterprise responses
    • Top pick for RFP response management
    • Good for security questionnaires and large-scale content reuse
    • Recommended in G2's 2026 RFP software list

      Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run

      Cite as: SlateIndex, “Qwilr vs Responsive”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/qwilr-vs-responsive, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.