Convious

Name: Convious
Brand: Convious

Experience Better

Est 2017|Raised $26.1M|46 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 7K|Web traffic 173K|FTEs 47|HQ Amsterdam, North Holland, NL

MarketsEvent Management Platforms Personalization Engines

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- Convious vs Ventrata: Ventrata is comparatively transparent on pricing and positions strongly around ticketing, POS, and OTA connectivity. Convious positions itself as broader in scope across commerce, marketing, and onsite experience; buyers should validate module maturity and operational depth. - Convious vs accesso: accesso markets a large installed base and a broad suite (ticketing, POS, queuing, distribution, mobile app). For very large venues, accesso may present a more established enterprise alternative, though it may require a more substantial implementation effort. - Convious vs Tiqets: Tiqets is often used as a distribution channel rather than a direct replacement for a core ticketing system. For smaller venues, a marketplace-first approach may be an alternative to a more complex platform.

Adoption trends / market signals

The vendor asserts a growing customer footprint and substantial ticketing/upsell volume.
Recent funding activity has been publicized and indicates external investor support.

These signals indicate market traction but do not by themselves validate product quality, stability, or suitability for every attraction type.

	Convious	Ventrata	Tiqets (for venues)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo/quote)	Subscription plan with an additional transaction fee component	Commission-based marketplace model (no fixed subscription required for distribution)
Typical Use Case	Attractions seeking a platform that integrates commerce, marketing, and onsite experience tools	Attractions/tours wanting ticketing + POS/webcheckout with transparent plan structure	Attractions prioritizing distribution reach and incremental sales via marketplace
Key Strength	Visitor-journey approach covering pre-visit through post-visit activities; support for dynamic pricing and engagement tools	Clear packaging; explicit transaction fee model; focused ticketing/POS feature set	Low fixed-cost entry; outsourced demand generation/distribution
Key Weakness	Limited public pricing and security detail; limited public customer review coverage in sources reviewed	Can become costly at scale with transaction fees; may be less oriented to marketing/engagement tooling	Marketplace dependency; commission costs; constraints on customer data and direct booking ownership depending on model

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Convious vs Ventrata: Ventrata is comparatively transparent on pricing and positions strongly around ticketing, POS, and OTA connectivity. Convious positions itself as broader in scope across commerce, marketing, and onsite experience; buyers should validate module maturity and operational depth.
Convious vs accesso: accesso markets a large installed base and a broad suite (ticketing, POS, queuing, distribution, mobile app). For very large venues, accesso may present a more established enterprise alternative, though it may require a more substantial implementation effort.
Convious vs Tiqets: Tiqets is often used as a distribution channel rather than a direct replacement for a core ticketing system. For smaller venues, a marketplace-first approach may be an alternative to a more complex platform.

Adoption trends / market signals

The vendor asserts a growing customer footprint and substantial ticketing/upsell volume.
Recent funding activity has been publicized and indicates external investor support.

These signals indicate market traction but do not by themselves validate product quality, stability, or suitability for every attraction type.

	Convious	Ventrata	Tiqets (for venues)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo/quote)	Subscription plan with an additional transaction fee component	Commission-based marketplace model (no fixed subscription required for distribution)
Typical Use Case	Attractions seeking a platform that integrates commerce, marketing, and onsite experience tools	Attractions/tours wanting ticketing + POS/webcheckout with transparent plan structure	Attractions prioritizing distribution reach and incremental sales via marketplace
Key Strength	Visitor-journey approach covering pre-visit through post-visit activities; support for dynamic pricing and engagement tools	Clear packaging; explicit transaction fee model; focused ticketing/POS feature set	Low fixed-cost entry; outsourced demand generation/distribution
Key Weakness	Limited public pricing and security detail; limited public customer review coverage in sources reviewed	Can become costly at scale with transaction fees; may be less oriented to marketing/engagement tooling	Marketplace dependency; commission costs; constraints on customer data and direct booking ownership depending on model