Wondering how evaluagentCX stacks up against Klaus?
Klaus (now Zendesk QA) caters to SMBs with a user-friendly interface and basic workflows – but it lacks integration flexibility, robustness for larger operations and customization when it comes to autoQA.
On the other hand, evaluagentCX boasts unmatched features:
Seamless automation to boost productivity
Guaranteed 100% interaction coverage
Agent-focused features to drive engagement
Actionable insights with clear reporting
Diverse range of native integrations and open API
Read more below to discover how evaluagentCX directly compares to Klaus.
Book a demo
Loading Form…
Key differences: evaluagentCX vs Klaus (Zendesk QA)
Integrations
Multi-channel
Auto-QA
Gamification
eLearning LMS
xNPS (expected net promotor score)
Redaction
Coaching & Feedback
Transcription
evaluagentCX
Seamlessly integrates with any customer management tool through a wide range of out-of-the-box options and open API.
100% of interactions analyzed automatically across ALL channels.
Highly customizable line items and insight topics.
Gamified rewards and recognition.
Fully integrated LMS tool.
Generative AI that predicts Net Promoter Scores across 100% of interactions.
Automatically redact customer sensitive data from the transcripts without compromising context.
Formalized workflows for feedback, coaching, and training, ideal for enterprise-level organizations.
Transcription included at no extra cost.
Klaus
Zendesk only lock-in.
Focused on text-based interactions.
Basic out-of-the-box.
No gamification features.
No LMS.
No xNPS.
No redaction.
Klaus has feedback processes only, which they refer to as coaching.
Call transcriptions charged per minute.
Get an impartial perspective
Here’s some honest feedback from customers and prospects who have tried both platforms, or switched from Klaus:
“evaluagentCX stood out with flexibility & customizability, They provide a comprehensive platform with features such as agent feedback which was not offered by Klaus.”
Quality Assurance Specialist at Online Trading Company
“I had plans to implement a QA tool in a large company with 450 agents, so it wasn’t just for small or medium-sized companies. Klaus didn’t seem to be the right fit for a contact center that size.”
Project Manager at Gaming & Entertainment Organisation
“Klaus’ sentiment analysis is limited. It only picks certain words and shows an emoji for that response, without reflecting the overall sentiment of the conversation. Insights aren’t labeled, and it can mark positive conversations as negative because it doesn’t consider the duration or flow of the conversation.”
Director of Contact Center Operations at Gaming Organisation
“We’re lacking reports in the Klaus reporting section. We need more data and more reports. Also, the auto QA isn’t working as well as we’d like. So, I’m doing a lot of manual work because Klaus’ reporting isn’t very helpful.”
Quality Manager at Financial Services Company
“With Klaus, I experienced difficulties filtering calls effectively, couldn’t use multiple scorecards for one call, lacked filtering options, I found their view options less customizable, and noticed issues with the acknowledgment feature, and found the reporting suite less advanced, particularly in terms of category line item and root cause analysis.”
Contact Center Manager at Online Retailer
See how we compare
Experience evaluagentCX
You’re just a click away from starting your journey towards intelligent automation of insight, QA and improvement. With evaluagentCX as your AI-powered co-pilot, you can create unrivaled customer experiences.
