Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| Events Manager | Request a Quote | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | — | — |
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Events Manager | Request a Quote |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 1.6 ★ | ★ 4.7 ★ |
| Total reviews | 8 | ★ 159 |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Pricing | $79/year | ★ $69/year |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, Request a Quote is the stronger choice for most WooCommerce Marketplace merchants — 4.7★ vs Events Manager's 1.6★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. Pricing sits in similar territory: Events Manager at $79/year, Request a Quote at $69/year (within ~25% of each other on the entry tier). At this overlap, total cost of ownership comes from how per-tier capacity gates align with your order volume — confirm both apps' upgrade triggers against your projected scale before deciding. Request a Quote has the larger user base (159 reviews vs 8), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Events Manager'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 Request a Quote; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Events Manager's 8-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Request a Quote'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: Events Manager audit • Request a Quote audit
| Keyword | Events Manager | Request a Quote |
|---|---|---|
| form | #400 | #119 |
| payment | #400 | #119 |
Both Events Manager and Request a Quote offer paid plans only. Events Manager starts at $79/year; Request a Quote starts at $69/year. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Request a Quote has the higher average rating (4.7★ from 159 reviews) compared to Events Manager (1.6★ from 8 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Events Manager fits better if you prioritize broader integrations; Request a Quote is the call if you need the higher-rated option. 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. Request a Quote has more onboarding documentation maturity (159 reviews vs 8), 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.
Events Manager typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (8 reviews). Request a Quote aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (159 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. Events Manager and Request a Quote 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 Events Manager" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
