Index › GTM › Customer › Contact center QA › Scorebuddy vs Insightful
Contact center quality assurance · November 2026 Edition

Scorebuddy vs Insightful

Two of fourteen models named Scorebuddy first on the direct prompt; one named Insightful. Scorebuddy was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Insightful by eight and Scorebuddy carries 20 labels and Insightful 14, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Scorebuddy

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

Insightful

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share10%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate5%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#7A position in a field of 17; printed, not drawn.
Labels2014A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Scorebuddy reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.EvaluAgent was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Voxjar vs Scorebuddy · Voxjar vs Insightful · EvaluAgent vs Scorebuddy

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the contact center quality assurance page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ScorebuddyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsInsightful
Direct21
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained311 against Scorebuddy
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Scorebuddy and Insightful were named in the same answer thirteen times, of the 61 answers naming Scorebuddy and the 32 naming Insightful. In those answers Insightful took the first choice three times and Scorebuddy five.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Scorebuddy and Insightful stood in it.
ModelDirectSCParaphraseSCComparativeSCBudget-constrainedSCScale-constrainedSCNegativeSC
Claude Haiku 4.5SC
GPT-5.4 miniSC
Gemini 3.5 FlashSCSCSCSC
Perplexity SonarSCSC
Grok 4.20SC
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 MaverickSC
Qwen 3.7 FlashSC
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashXSC
MiniMax M2.5SC
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30BSCSC
SC Scorebuddy InsightfulSC first choiceSC named as an alternativeSC argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Scorebuddy on the left and Insightful on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Scorebuddy and Insightful stood in it.

Scorebuddy first, Insightful not the choice

2 of 14 modelsInsightful was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity SonarScorebuddy alternatives: Level AI, Rippit, formerly MaestroQA, Talkdesk Quality Management, Voxjar, Zendesk QA
Muse Glimmer 30BPlayvox QM, Scorebuddy alternatives: Balto, CloudTalk, EvaluAgent

Insightful first, Scorebuddy not the choice

1 of 14 modelsScorebuddy was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Mistral SmallInsightful, Zendesk QA alternatives: CallFinder, EvaluAgent

Neither was the first choice, one was named

4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashMaestroQA alternatives: EvaluAgent, Level AI, Scorebuddy, Zendesk QA
Grok 4.20ScorebuddyCX alternatives: CloudTalk, EvaluAgent, Insightful, SQM CX Quality™, Zendesk QA
Qwen 3.7 FlashVoxjar alternatives: EvaluAgent, Insightful, Zendesk QA
MiniMax M2.5MaestroQA alternatives: Convin, Scorebuddy

Neither was named

7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5ScorebuddyCX alternatives: CloudTalk, EvaluAgent, Voxjar
GPT-5.4 miniTalkdesk Quality Management alternatives: EvaluAgent, MaestroQA, Salesforce Service Cloud, ScorebuddyCX, my.SQM Auto QA
DeepSeek V4 FlashZendesk QA alternatives: EvaluAgent, Observe.AI, ScorebuddyCX, Voxjar
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2EvaluAgent alternatives: MaestroQA, Observe.AI, Zendesk QA
GLM 4.7 FlashXPlayvox QM, ScorebuddyCX alternatives: CloudTalk, EvaluAgent
GPT-6 LunaEvaluAgent alternatives: Level AI, ScorebuddyCX, Zendesk QA

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Scorebuddy leads by fifteen points.
Scorebuddy20%#2 of 13
Insightful6%#6 of 13
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Scorebuddy leads by six points.
Scorebuddy10%#5 of 17
Insightful4%#7 of 17
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Scorebuddy0%#– of 15
Insightful0%#– of 15
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Scorebuddy

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.

“capable choices for human-led QA, but pricing is generally less transparent and may be less suitable for a very constrained budget” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“For very tight budgets, Scorebuddy and EvaluAgent offer transparent, predictable per-seat pricing.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Scorebuddy is the best dedicated contact-center QA choice.” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
“The best contact center quality assurance tool for a company with a limited budget is Scorebuddy.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Insightful

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.

“Insightful and Zendesk QA are top contenders due to their comprehensive features, ease of use, and strong integration capabilities” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
“Recommendation: Start with Insightful if you have fewer than 20 agents.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Real-time dashboards, smart scorecards, and performance tracking. Highly rated (4.8/5) for mid-size businesses” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.