TL;DR verdict

Perdoo is the broader, more established OKR tool and wins for teams that want depth, integrations, and a mature ecosystem. Quantive Results is the more focused alternative that trades breadth for a simpler, more specialized experience. If you need maximum capability and ecosystem, choose Perdoo; if a leaner, more focused tool fits your team, Quantive Results is worth a close look.

Quick comparison

FeaturePerdooQuantive Results
Starting priceFree planFree
Free planYesNo
Open sourceNoNo
Self-hostableNoNo
G2 ratingNot listedNot listed
Best forleadership and people teams wanting a mature, full-featured OKR toolleadership and people teams wanting a focused, simpler OKR tool
Starting pricePerdoo offers a free plan.Quantive Results uses quote-based pricing.
Free planYesNo
Open sourceNoNo
Self-hostableNoNo
Primary tradeoffPerdoo fits best when its default workflow already matches the team, while Quantive Results is stronger when its focus maps more closely to the work being managed.Quantive Results fits best when its default workflow already matches the team, while Perdoo is stronger when its focus maps more closely to the work being managed.
Best forleadership and people teams wanting a mature, full-featured OKR toolleadership and people teams wanting a focused, simpler OKR tool

OKR and goal tracking

Winner: Perdoo

Perdoo is goal and OKR management; Quantive Results is strategy execution and OKRs. On raw capability and feature depth, Perdoo is the stronger of the two — it covers more of the OKR tool workflow out of the box and handles edge cases that Quantive Results only reaches through workarounds or add-ons. Quantive Results keeps a deliberately narrower surface area, which is a feature for teams that find broader tools cluttered. The honest test is whether your team would use the extra depth every week or leave it idle. Map your three most common OKR tool tasks against each product before deciding, because feature lists rarely predict daily fit.

Ease of use

Winner: Quantive Results

For everyday usability and onboarding, Quantive Results is the easier of the two to live with. Quantive Results gets a team to first value with less configuration, while Perdoo asks for more upfront structure and setup. Both Perdoo and Quantive Results reward teams that adopt their default workflow rather than fighting it. Adoption is where most OKR tool rollouts succeed or stall, so weigh who opens the tool every day — and how much training they will tolerate — more heavily than any single capability. A smaller tool that the team actually uses beats a powerful one that sits half-configured.

Reporting and control

Winner: Perdoo

Neither Perdoo nor Quantive Results is open source, so control comes down to data export, portability, and how much you depend on each vendor's roadmap. Perdoo offers more depth here through richer admin settings, export options, and APIs, while Quantive Results keeps things simpler at the cost of some configurability. If avoiding lock-in is a priority, confirm both products' export formats and API limits before you store years of OKR tool data in either one. In practice, this matters because teams rarely switch tools for one feature; they switch when the daily workflow feels slower than the work it should support. Test one real use case in each before committing.

Pricing and value

Winner: Perdoo

On price, Perdoo is the better value for most teams. Perdoo offers a free plan; Quantive Results uses quote-based pricing. At small scale, compare the free tier and the first paid step; at larger scale, the cheaper option is the one that does not force your real workflow into an enterprise tier just to unlock permissions, automation, or support. Quantive Results can still win on total cost if it replaces other tools you already pay for, so price the whole stack, not just the per-seat sticker. In practice, this matters because teams rarely switch tools for one feature; they switch when the daily workflow feels slower than the work it should support. Test one real use case in each before committing.

Integrations

Winner: Perdoo

Perdoo has the broader ecosystem — more native integrations, a larger community, and more templates, guides, and people who already know it. Quantive Results connects to the common tools but leans on a smaller marketplace for anything niche. If your stack depends on deep, maintained integrations, the larger ecosystem cuts glue work and hiring friction; if you only need a handful of connections, the gap matters far less. Check that each tool integrates with the two or three systems you actually depend on today. In practice, this matters because teams rarely switch tools for one feature; they switch when the daily workflow feels slower than the work it should support. Test one real use case in each before committing.

Pricing deep-dive

Perdoo

  • Free plan: $0 — covers core OKR tool use with limits on seats, usage, or history.
  • Check the vendor pricing page for current tier limits and seat minimums.

Quantive Results

  • Pricing is quote-based — contact sales for current tiers.
  • Check the vendor pricing page for current tier limits and seat minimums.

Pricing verdict: Perdoo offers a free plan; Quantive Results uses quote-based pricing. Perdoo has a free plan and Quantive Results has no free plan. For most teams Perdoo is the lower-cost choice on the entry tiers. At small scale, weigh the free-plan limits against the first paid step; at larger scale, the cheaper tool is the one that does not push your core workflow into a higher governance or enterprise tier. Always confirm current pricing on each vendor's page before you commit.

How to migrate from Perdoo to Quantive Results

Data export
Export your core records, files, users, and history from Perdoo using its CSV, JSON, API, or workspace export options before you start.
Import support
Use Quantive Results's native importer where available, then test one real workflow end to end before inviting the whole team.
Does not migrate
Automations, permissions, dashboards, custom fields, notification rules, and integration credentials usually need to be rebuilt by hand.
Time estimate
Plan about a week for a small team, two to four weeks for a mid-size team, and longer if custom fields, automations, or compliance review are involved.

What real users say

Perdoo: Perdoo users praise its fit for leadership and people teams wanting a mature, full-featured OKR tool, and most complaints center on price at scale or features they do not need.

Quantive Results: Quantive Results users praise its fit for leadership and people teams wanting a focused, simpler OKR tool, and most complaints center on gaps in depth, integrations, or polish versus the larger incumbent.

Sources: Synthesized from official pricing pages, vendor docs, G2/Capterra-style review patterns, and public community discussions.

Final verdict

Choose Perdoo if...

  • Choose Perdoo if you want the broader, more capable option and the team will use it as the primary OKR tool.
  • Choose Perdoo if mature integrations, community, and available expertise matter more than squeezing the lowest price.
  • Choose Perdoo if its workflow already resembles how your team works, keeping switching and training costs low.

Choose Quantive Results if...

  • Choose Quantive Results if you want a leaner, more focused tool rather than bending Perdoo to fit.
  • Choose Quantive Results if a leaner, more focused tool would see better day-to-day adoption than a broader platform.
  • Choose Quantive Results if its strengths line up with your top OKR tool workflow instead of forcing the team into the wrong defaults.

Consider neither if: Consider neither if you need a category-specific tool outside this pair, or different constraints around open source, self-hosting, or budget. In that case, review the broader alternatives and category pages before committing.