Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| B2B for WooCommerce | Razorpay | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | — | — |
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | B2B for WooCommerce | Razorpay |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.7 ★ | 3.2 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 136 | 9 |
| Free plan | — | ★ Yes |
| Pricing | $179/year | ★ Free |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, B2B for WooCommerce is the stronger choice for most WooCommerce Marketplace merchants — 4.7★ vs Razorpay's 3.2★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. On pricing, Razorpay offers a free tier (Free) while B2B for WooCommerce starts at $179/year. The free option meaningfully reduces evaluation cost, particularly for stores at sub-1K monthly orders where the entry-paid tier can outpace the value delivered. B2B for WooCommerce has the larger user base (136 reviews vs 9), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Razorpay's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to B2B for WooCommerce; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Razorpay's 9-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than B2B for WooCommerce'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 WooCommerce 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: B2B for WooCommerce audit • Razorpay audit
| Keyword | B2B for WooCommerce | Razorpay |
|---|---|---|
| payment | #144 | #103 |
| form | #144 | #103 |
Razorpay is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free). B2B for WooCommerce starts at $179/year. Both publish their pricing on the WooCommerce Marketplace marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
B2B for WooCommerce has the higher average rating (4.7★ from 136 reviews) compared to Razorpay (3.2★ from 9 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. B2B for WooCommerce fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Razorpay 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 WooCommerce Marketplace marketplace. B2B for WooCommerce has more onboarding documentation maturity (136 reviews vs 9), 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.
B2B for WooCommerce typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (136 reviews). Razorpay aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (9 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. B2B for WooCommerce and Razorpay 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 Razorpay" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
