Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Quickly convert your PDFs, Docs, and Slides to Google Forms™.
| Automagical Forms | Table of contents | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Automagical Forms | Table of contents |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.4 ★ | 3.4 ★ |
| Total reviews | 3.1k | ★ 3.1k |
| Active installs | 33,571,825+ | 4,244,665+ |
| Free plan | ★ Yes | — |
| Pricing | Free of charge with paid features | Not available |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
| Featured placements | 1 | — |
Based on the data on this page, Automagical Forms is the stronger choice for most Google Workspace Marketplace merchants — 4.4★ vs Table of contents's 3.4★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. On pricing, Automagical Forms offers a free tier (Free of charge with paid features) while Table of contents starts at Not available. For early-stage stores or merchants validating fit, the free-tier path lets you run the app on real orders before committing budget. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to Automagical Forms; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Table of contents's 3,104-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Automagical Forms's broader-but-shallower coverage. This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Google Workspace Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Automagical Forms audit • Table of contents audit
| Keyword | Automagical Forms | Table of contents |
|---|---|---|
| forms | #2 | Not ranked |
Not featured in any section recently.
Automagical Forms is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free of charge with paid features). Table of contents starts at Not available. Both publish their pricing on the Google Workspace Marketplace marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
Automagical Forms has the higher average rating (4.4★ from 3,077 reviews) compared to Table of contents (3.4★ from 3,104 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Automagical Forms fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Table of contents is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace marketplace. Table of contents has more onboarding documentation maturity (3,104 reviews vs 3,077), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
Automagical Forms typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (3,077 reviews). Table of contents aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (3,104 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Automagical Forms and Table of contents both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Automagical Forms" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.