On features these two look closer than they are. The decision usually comes down to who each company currently wants as a customer, and how openly they say what they charge.
Published by Voxjar, which competes with both and is included as a third option below. We have said plainly where each of the other two wins, including the things we do not do at all.
EvaluAgent automates a QA workflow that a quality team would recognise: scorecards, calibration, coaching and agent-facing feedback, with AI applied across it. It is aimed at mid-market teams and it is relatively open about cost, landing around $30 per user per month with an AI add-on on top.
Solidroad approaches from AI training and simulation, extending into automated QA. It is a younger, Y Combinator-backed product with a genuinely different idea about how scoring and practice connect. It has also repositioned to serve enterprise CX teams, removing public pricing in favour of a demo request.
So a mid-market QA lead comparing the two is comparing a vendor that will quote them a per-user number against a vendor that may not take the meeting. That is a fit question rather than a product one, and it is the one most likely to decide the outcome. The third column exists because both of these still price per user, and that is not the only available model.
| Solidroad | EvaluAgent | Voxjar | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Origin | AI training and simulation | QA workflow automation | AI-native QA |
| Automated QA scoring | |||
| Visible reasoning behind each score | Not documented | Not documented | |
| AI roleplay and simulation | |||
| Calibration workflows | Present | Mature | AI and human side by side |
| Agent-facing feedback | Present | A core strength | |
| Published pricing | Roughly $30/user/month | Yes, from $99/month | |
| Pricing basis | Not disclosed | Per user | Volume of conversation analyzed |
| AI priced separately | Not disclosed | Yes, add-on | No, included |
| Unlimited users on every plan | Not disclosed | ||
| Self-serve entry | No longer, enterprise only | Sales-assisted | Yes, free tier |
| Serves mid-market | Decreasingly |
Voxjar is the third column, and the difference is what the bill is attached to. Both products above price per user. Voxjar charges for the call volume you analyze, with unlimited users on every plan and the AI included instead of sold as an add-on. Antheus used it to reach 100% coverage while cutting QA overhead 60%.
The product itself: monitor 100% of your calls against criteria you write yourself, see the reasoning behind every score, hand any question to a human, and calibrate the AI against your own reviewers. Pricing is published from $99/month, with a free tier to test on your own calls before anyone quotes you.
Where we do not compete: Solidroad's simulation has no equivalent here. If practice scenarios are the point of the purchase, that is the reason to choose them. Disclosure: this page is published by Voxjar.
EvaluAgent has typically been around $30 per user per month, with AI capabilities sold as an add-on on top of the base license. Exact pricing depends on team size and modules, so treat that as a planning figure rather than a quote.
Solidroad removed public pricing when it repositioned toward enterprise CX teams. It previously offered tiered self-serve plans. Today the only route is a demo request and a custom quote.
Between those two, EvaluAgent, simply because it is actively selling to that segment and will give you a number. Solidroad may still be a strong fit technically, but the commercial motion is pointed at larger organisations.
It is the default, which is why it rarely gets questioned. It also means QA gets more expensive exactly as it starts working and you want more people looking at results. Voxjar prices on the volume of conversation analyzed instead, with unlimited users, which is cheaper for large teams scoring modest volumes and more expensive for tiny teams scoring everything. Model both against your own numbers.
Only if your problem is agent performance under pressure rather than visibility. Scoring tells you what is going wrong; simulation is one way to fix it, and coaching or training content is another. Buy simulation when you have already diagnosed the gap and know practice is the remedy.
Get 120 AI Credits and Full Access
