Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Viewer for easy reading of exported WhatsApp chat logs (.txt file). You can view the log as if you're viewing it in the app itself.
| Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ | Patronum | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ | Patronum |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.2 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 358 | 31 |
| Active installs | 242,075+ | 440,372+ |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free of charge | Free of charge trial |
Based on the data on this page, Patronum is the stronger choice for most Google Workspace Marketplace admins — 5.0★ vs Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™'s 4.2★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Pricing entry tiers: Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ at Free of charge, Patronum at Free of charge trial. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (seats, usage volume, integrations) varies.
Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ has the larger user base (358 reviews vs 31), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Patronum's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to Patronum; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™'s 358-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Patronum'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: Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ audit • Patronum audit
Both Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ and Patronum offer paid plans only. Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ starts at Free of charge; Patronum starts at Free of charge trial. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Patronum has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 31 reviews) compared to Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ (4.2★ from 358 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Patronum holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.2★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace. Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ has the deeper published review base (358 vs 31), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (358 reviews). Patronum typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (31 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Chat Viewer for WhatsApp™ and Patronum 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 Patronum" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
