AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI vs Participation & Speaking Time Tracker

Based on the data on this page, Participation & Speaking Time Tracker is the stronger choice for most Zoom App Marketplace teams — 3.2★ vs AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI's 2.2★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.

AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI has the larger user base (113 reviews vs 5), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Participation & Speaking Time Tracker's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.

Recommended by size: small/early-stage teams who need fast install and low risk should default to Participation & Speaking Time Tracker; mid-market and enterprise teams with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI's 113-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Participation & Speaking Time Tracker'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 Zoom App 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.

Which has better reviews, AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI or Participation & Speaking Time Tracker?

Participation & Speaking Time Tracker has the higher average rating (3.2★ from 5 reviews) compared to AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI (2.2★ from 113 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.

Should I choose AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI or Participation & Speaking Time Tracker?

Participation & Speaking Time Tracker holds the higher average rating (3.2★ vs 2.2★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.

Which is faster to set up, AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI or Participation & Speaking Time Tracker?

Both apps are one-click installs from the Zoom App Marketplace. AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI has the deeper published review base (113 vs 5), 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.

Which works better for small vs large Zoom App Marketplace teams?

AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (113 reviews). Participation & Speaking Time Tracker typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (5 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.

Can I migrate data between AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI and Participation & Speaking Time Tracker?

Migration support varies by app and category. AI-generated meeting summaries by Read AI and Participation & Speaking Time Tracker 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 Participation & Speaking Time Tracker" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.