Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| Composite Products | Quick View | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | — | — |
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Composite Products | Quick View |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.8 ★ | 1.5 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 107 | 3 |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Pricing | $149/year | ★ $59/year |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, Composite Products is the stronger choice for most WooCommerce Marketplace merchants — 4.8★ vs Quick View's 1.5★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. Pricing differs significantly: Quick View at $59/year vs Composite Products at $149/year (Composite Products is roughly 2.5x the entry-tier cost of Quick View). The pricier tier typically signals deeper feature coverage or higher capacity ceilings; confirm the gap matches your actual feature requirements before treating cost as the deciding factor. Composite Products has the larger user base (107 reviews vs 3), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Quick View'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 Composite Products; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Quick View's 3-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Composite Products'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: Composite Products audit • Quick View audit
| Keyword | Composite Products | Quick View |
|---|---|---|
| form | #77 | #64 |
| payment | #77 | #64 |
Both Composite Products and Quick View offer paid plans only. Composite Products starts at $149/year; Quick View starts at $59/year. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Composite Products has the higher average rating (4.8★ from 107 reviews) compared to Quick View (1.5★ from 3 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Composite Products fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Quick View 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. Composite Products has more onboarding documentation maturity (107 reviews vs 3), 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.
Composite Products typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (107 reviews). Quick View aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (3 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. Composite Products and Quick View 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 Quick View" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
