MedUX

Name: MedUX
Brand: MedUX

The Internet Quality of Experience (QoE) testing and monitoring company

Est 2014|Valuation $29.1M|Raised $23.3M|9 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 4K|Web traffic 2K|FTEs 61|HQ Madrid, Community of Madrid, ES

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

- Where MedUX appears to have strengths: - Convergent fixed + mobile QoE approach using multiple data collection modalities (probes, SDKs, crowdsourcing). - Vendor materials emphasize regulatory program use cases and selection in public initiatives. - The acquisition of a crowdsourcing provider is intended to expand crowdsourced measurement scale. - Where alternatives may have advantages: - Ookla: well-known consumer brand and broad testing footprint; potentially easier for stakeholders to interpret because of Speedtest recognition. - Opensignal: recognized for comparative benchmarking reports and third-party visibility. - Instrumentation vendors (Rohde & Schwarz, Spirent, VIAVI): often preferred for lab-grade validation and standardized test equipment ecosystems. - Adoption trends / corporate activity: - Recent funding and acquisition activity indicate expansion efforts; the company remains smaller than some global incumbents in this market.

	MedUX	Ookla (Speedtest Intelligence)	Opensignal
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo/quote)	Typically enterprise quote (not publicly listed for Intelligence products)	Typically enterprise quote (not publicly listed)
Best For	Operators/regulators needing a blended probes + SDK + crowdsourcing + analytics approach	Consumer-facing Speedtest brand with broad measurement footprint and benchmarking services	Network experience benchmarking and insights commonly used in telecom reporting
Key Strength	Multi-modality data collection; stated regulatory program use cases; combined probe and crowdsourcing approach	Well-known Speedtest consumer brand; broad measurement footprint and benchmarking services	Focused network experience benchmarking with public comparative reports
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party reviews; limited public security/compliance disclosures; pricing opacity	Consumer-initiated tests may introduce sampling bias; enterprise packaging can be complex	Methodology debates and pricing opacity; may not cover probe/robot-heavy active testing needs

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

Where MedUX appears to have strengths:
- Convergent fixed + mobile QoE approach using multiple data collection modalities (probes, SDKs, crowdsourcing).
- Vendor materials emphasize regulatory program use cases and selection in public initiatives.
- The acquisition of a crowdsourcing provider is intended to expand crowdsourced measurement scale.
Where alternatives may have advantages:
- Ookla: well-known consumer brand and broad testing footprint; potentially easier for stakeholders to interpret because of Speedtest recognition.
- Opensignal: recognized for comparative benchmarking reports and third-party visibility.
- Instrumentation vendors (Rohde & Schwarz, Spirent, VIAVI): often preferred for lab-grade validation and standardized test equipment ecosystems.
Adoption trends / corporate activity:
- Recent funding and acquisition activity indicate expansion efforts; the company remains smaller than some global incumbents in this market.

	MedUX	Ookla (Speedtest Intelligence)	Opensignal
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo/quote)	Typically enterprise quote (not publicly listed for Intelligence products)	Typically enterprise quote (not publicly listed)
Best For	Operators/regulators needing a blended probes + SDK + crowdsourcing + analytics approach	Consumer-facing Speedtest brand with broad measurement footprint and benchmarking services	Network experience benchmarking and insights commonly used in telecom reporting
Key Strength	Multi-modality data collection; stated regulatory program use cases; combined probe and crowdsourcing approach	Well-known Speedtest consumer brand; broad measurement footprint and benchmarking services	Focused network experience benchmarking with public comparative reports
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party reviews; limited public security/compliance disclosures; pricing opacity	Consumer-initiated tests may introduce sampling bias; enterprise packaging can be complex	Methodology debates and pricing opacity; may not cover probe/robot-heavy active testing needs

MedUX

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

02Market Map