Qvidian

Name: Qvidian
Brand: Upland Software
Rating: 4.2 (226 reviews)

Name a challenge. We’ve got a product to solve it.

Est 2010|Valuation $10.4M|Raised $1.1B|121 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 4K|Website|Web traffic 55K|FTEs 760|HQ Austin, Texas, US

MarketsProcure-to-Pay RFP Response Management

Where Qvidian tends to be a good fit: - Organizations with repeatable proposal/RFP patterns that benefit from a centralized library and structured workflows - Teams that require structured review cycles, permissions, and auditability and therefore prioritize mature enterprise features Where competitors may be stronger: - Loopio: clearer published entry pricing and a focus on usability and AI messaging that can simplify initial procurement - Responsive (RFPIO): strong market visibility and positioning around AI and collaboration; organizations should validate claims against specific integration and governance needs Market adoption / visibility signals: - Qvidian has been referenced in landscape reports and vendor press materials; inclusion in a landscape is an indicator of visibility but not a ranking of relative capability.

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where Qvidian tends to be a good fit:

Organizations with repeatable proposal/RFP patterns that benefit from a centralized library and structured workflows
Teams that require structured review cycles, permissions, and auditability and therefore prioritize mature enterprise features

Where competitors may be stronger:

Loopio: clearer published entry pricing and a focus on usability and AI messaging that can simplify initial procurement
Responsive (RFPIO): strong market visibility and positioning around AI and collaboration; organizations should validate claims against specific integration and governance needs

Market adoption / visibility signals:

Qvidian has been referenced in landscape reports and vendor press materials; inclusion in a landscape is an indicator of visibility but not a ranking of relative capability.

	Upland Qvidian	Loopio	Responsive (formerly RFPIO)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote-based)	Publicly lists entry pricing for its Foundations tier	Not publicly listed (quote-based)
Typical Fit	Mid-market/enterprise teams needing a governed content library, workflows, and proposal assembly	Teams seeking a modern UI, clearer entry pricing, and strong AI positioning	Enterprises that prioritize response management depth, broad collaboration features, and AI capabilities
Key Strength	Mature content management and workflow capabilities for proposal/RFP operations	Clearer published entry pricing and strong positioning around usability and AI	Broad feature set and wide adoption
Key Weakness	Ongoing library maintenance requirements and learning curve; pricing opacity	Costs can scale and governance is still required	Pricing opacity and potential complexity for smaller teams