Software advice
Best AI Contact Center QA Software in 2026
AI contact center QA software scores recorded or live customer conversations against a quality scorecard, so supervisors no longer sample a few calls per agent by hand. It transcribes voice and chat, flags compliance and tone problems, and feeds coaching. It is not a phone system, a workforce scheduler or a general chatbot builder, although several vendors sell those next to it.
Quick answer
EvaluAgent ranks first because it prints per-seat prices and scores every conversation against custom scorecards. Insight7 fits small teams that want a free tier and a stated no-training policy. Zendesk QA fits teams already running Zendesk Support.
A QA manager at a contact center usually reviews two to five percent of calls by hand and wants every conversation scored without hiring more reviewers. Vendors now sell automatic scoring, coaching workflows, real-time agent assist and QA for AI agents, often bundled into a platform whose price is never printed. This ranking weighs what the pages state: published seat prices, whether scoring covers all conversations, hosting and training statements, certifications and which telephony or helpdesk systems connect. We read vendor pages in November 2026 and ran no tool, so speed and accuracy claims are the vendors' own. Ten of the thirteen vendors publish no price at all.
The 13 best AI contact center QA software in 2026, ranked
There is no score. Vendors can pay for more visibility on this website, for example a higher place in a ranking or more room on a page. Commercial relationships can also affect which products we feature and how prominently. How we rank.
| # | Tool | Best for | Free plan | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EvaluAgent | QA teams that want automatic scoring on every conversation with printed seat prices | No | from $35 per user per month |
| 2 | Insight7 | Small teams that want a free start, printed tiers and a stated no-training policy | Yes | $99 per month, billed $990 a year |
| 3 | Zendesk QA | Teams already on Zendesk Support or Suite that want QA on human and AI agents | Trial | €19 per agent per month, billed annually (Support Team base plan) |
| 4 | Enthu.AI | Mid-size teams that want to test automatic scoring on real calls before paying | Trial | Quoted |
| 5 | Convin | Teams that want QA, coaching and real-time assist from one vendor | Yes | Quoted |
| 6 | Observe.AI | Contact centers that want AI agents, coaching and QA on one platform | No | Quoted |
| 7 | CallMiner | Regulated centers that want QA, compliance and risk analytics in one analytics suite | No | Quoted |
| 8 | NICE | Large operations already on NICE CXone that want QA inside the same platform | No | Quoted |
| 9 | Balto | Teams that want live agent prompts and QA from one per-seat plan | No | Quoted |
| 10 | Level AI | Enterprise teams that want automatic QA, agent assist and voice agents together | No | Quoted |
| 11 | Verint | Large centers that want QA, recording and workforce tools under one vendor | No | Quoted |
| 12 | Intryc | Customer support teams on Intercom that want AI scorecards and simulations | No | Quoted |
| 13 | Cresta | Large enterprises that want coaching and a training simulator beside QA | No | Quoted |
- 1
EvaluAgent ranks first because it is the most QA-specific product with a printed price. A buyer sees $35 per seat for automatic scoring and coaching, a $65 tier with intent and sentiment, SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001, and a long integration list. Bot QA is a rare extra. Gaps are the unnamed hosting region, no stated training policy and quote-only pricing for large teams and AI agents.
Strong on
- Scores 100% of conversations with custom scorecards and reasoning on each qualitative line item
- Lists bot QA scoring, fabrication detection and handover tracking for AI agents
- Names Genesys Cloud, NICE CXone, Five9, Talkdesk and Amazon Connect among its integrations
Weak on
- Sentiment, reason for contact and summaries sit only in the higher $65 tier
- Hosting region and AI training policy are not stated on the pages read
Skip it if: Teams that need a free tier or a named EU hosting region, because the pages show neither. Covers AutoQM and Improvement per human seat; the $65 tier adds conversation intelligence; AI-agent work is quoted per conversation.
- 2
Insight7 sits second because its plans, volume caps and data policy are all readable. Pro costs $99 a month for one user and 50 analyses, and the privacy policy says it does not train its AI engine on your data unless you consent. SOC 2 Type II is stated. The catch is volume: 200 analyses on Business is small for a real contact center, and the jump to Plus is large.
Strong on
- Free plan, then Pro, Business and Plus tiers with printed prices and analysis allowances
- Privacy policy states no AI engine training on user data without consent
- Business adds PII and PHI redaction, keyword alerts and custom vocabulary
Weak on
- Call analyses are capped per tier, 50 on Pro and 200 on Business
- No refund for a billing period already paid, per its FAQ
Skip it if: High-volume centers scoring thousands of calls a month, since only Enterprise lists unlimited analysis and it is quote only. Pro covers 1 user and 50 call or transcript analyses; higher tiers raise users and volume.
- 3
Zendesk QA ranks third because it is a good fit only if you already run Zendesk. It reviews 100% of conversations from human agents, AI agents and BPOs, and shows the steps an AI agent took with feedback per step. The add-on price is not on the pages we read, it needs a Support or Suite plan first, and a statement on training is missing.
Strong on
- Analyzes conversations from human agents, AI agents and BPOs across channels and languages
- Reasoning checks show each step an AI agent took, with feedback per step
- Sits beside a marketplace of more than 1,800 apps and integrations
Weak on
- QA add-on price is not published and requires a sales conversation
- Needs a Zendesk Support or Suite plan before the add-on can be used
Skip it if: Contact centers on Genesys, Five9 or another non-Zendesk stack, since the pages name only Zendesk products and its marketplace. That is the base helpdesk seat; the QA add-on price is not published and needs Support or Suite.
- 4
Enthu.AI takes fourth because it lets a buyer try the full plan for 14 days without a card and offers a 30-day proof of concept. It names GenAI auto QA, call summaries, sentiment and SOC 2 Type II, and its integration list covers Five9, Talkdesk, Genesys, Avaya, RingCentral and Dialpad. Price stays hidden until a demo, and the legal entity is not named on the pages we read.
Strong on
- Free 14-day trial of the full plan with no credit card and a 30-day proof of concept
- Auto QA, call summaries, sentiment analysis and automatic redaction of PII, PCI and PHI
- Integrations page lists Five9, Talkdesk, Genesys, Avaya, RingCentral and Dialpad
Weak on
- No published price; quote only after a demo, billed semi-annually or annually
- Cancellation goes by email, and contact details stay kept for marketing afterwards
Skip it if: Buyers who need a printed price list or a named legal entity before they speak to sales. No price list: a quote follows a demo, with a free 14-day trial and a 30-day proof of concept available.
- 5
Convin lands fifth with a broad but quote-based suite: automated QA on 100% of conversations, peer coaching, an AI learning system and real-time assist. Security is better documented than at most rivals, with SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, HIPAA and a named hosting setup. A free quality management label hints at an entry point, but no terms are printed and products are split into separate suites.
Strong on
- Automated QA, coaching and an AI learning management system built from call data
- Security page states SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR readiness and HIPAA
- Privacy policy states request logs are kept 30 days and storage is within India
Weak on
- No prices; a quote is needed for every suite, and the free offer's terms are unclear
- Products are split into phone, real-time and post-call suites, which complicates comparison
Skip it if: Buyers needing EU data hosting, since the pages describe India and AWS rather than an EU region. A free quality management label appears in the navigation; terms were not opened. Every suite is quoted.
- 6
Observe.AI is sixth: a capable-looking platform that sells AI agents, assist, coaching and evaluation of 100% of interactions together. Security is documented, with ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2, PCI DSS, per-customer S3 buckets and AES-256. Pricing is absent, retention periods are not fixed in the privacy policy, and the product leans toward AI agents, which a pure QA buyer may not need.
Strong on
- Evaluates 100% of interactions and ties coaching programs to outcomes
- Security page lists ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2, PCI DSS, GDPR and per-customer storage buckets
- Names Amazon Connect, Aircall, Avaya and 8x8 as integrations
Weak on
- No public prices; the platform is sold by quote only
- Privacy policy gives retention criteria but no fixed periods
Skip it if: Teams that only want scorecard-based QA, since the platform is built around AI agents and real-time assist as well. No price list; the pricing URL returns an error and the platform is sold on quote.
- 7
CallMiner ranks seventh because it targets large, regulated operations that need quality management next to compliance and risk analytics. The security page lists SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001:2022, HITRUST and PCI DSS controls. The price is not published, the integrations page names no products in its text, and no training statement or free trial turned up on the pages read.
Strong on
- Quality management and compliance and risk analytics on the Eureka platform
- Real-time assistance and post-call insights for frontline agents
- Security page lists SOC 2 Type II, HITRUST, ISO 27001:2022 and PCI DSS controls
Weak on
- No prices published and no free trial found on the pages read
- Integrations page names no products, so connection options need to be asked
Skip it if: Small teams or buyers who want to see prices and test a free tier before talking to sales. No prices; the pricing URL redirects to the Eureka product page, which offers demos.
- 8
NICE ranks eighth because its quality management module only makes sense inside CXone. It evaluates 100% of interactions with AI, adds Copilot for Supervisors and a training module, and states PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2 with HITRUST, IRAP and FedRAMP for the platform. Package prices are quote only, and the certifications are stated for CXone as a whole, not per module.
Strong on
- Evaluates 100% of interactions with AI and supports coaching
- Trust page states PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2 with HITRUST, IRAP and FedRAMP for CXone
Weak on
- Package amounts are not shown, only a quote request
- Quality Management is one module of the CXone suite, not sold on its own in the pages read
Skip it if: Teams on another phone platform or buyers who want a stand-alone QA tool with a visible price. CXone packages are quoted on request; amounts were not in the page text opened.
- 9
Balto ranks ninth because its strength is real-time guidance during the call, with QA and coaching attached. Balto Plus bundles Agent Assist, Insights, QA/QM and AI coaching into a per-seat plan, and the security page states SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA and PCI DSS. No dollar amounts appear, data centers are in the United States, and its policy says client call information is used for product development.
Strong on
- Balto Plus bundles Agent Assist, Insights, QA/QM and AI coaching in one plan
- States SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA compliance and PCI DSS certification
- Integrates with Zoom, Cisco, RingCentral, Genesys, NICE, Five9, Salesforce and Vonage
Weak on
- No price figures; seats are quoted and the Togo voice agent is billed per minute
- Privacy policy says client call information supports product development, with training use not addressed
Skip it if: Buyers who need EU hosting or a post-call QA tool without real-time prompts. One plan, Balto Plus, priced per seat; the Togo voice agent is priced per minute. No figures printed.
- 10
Level AI is tenth. It scores every customer interaction, adds Agent Assist and AI voice agents, and its security page lists ISO 27001, SOC 2, HIPAA, GDPR and PCI, with third-party AI providers barred from training on customer data. The price list is absent, and the privacy policy describes a desktop screen recording application whose scope for agents should be checked in the contract.
Strong on
- Auto-QA scores every customer interaction and feeds insights
- Security page bars third-party AI providers from training on customer data
- Named integrations include Zendesk, Five9, Intercom, Twilio, Slack and Zoom
Weak on
- No public price list and no free plan found
- Desktop screen-recording application can capture screen content and audio, per the privacy policy
Skip it if: Teams wanting public pricing or a QA-only product without voice agents and desktop recording. No pricing page; the pricing URL returns an error and the platform is sold by quote.
- 11
Verint ranks eleventh because the pages give a buyer little to verify. Quality Intelligence evaluates 100% of human and automated interactions, and Quality Bot automates evaluations in a Fiserv case study. Calabrio now sits under Verint, so the range is wide. No prices, certifications, hosting region or integration list appeared, and the privacy notice could not be opened.
Strong on
- Quality Intelligence evaluates 100% of human and automated interactions across channels
- Quality Bot automates evaluations, shown in a Fiserv customer case
Weak on
- No prices, certifications or hosting region on the pages opened
- Privacy notice linked from the homepage could not be opened at the addresses tried
Skip it if: Buyers who need written security and data statements up front, since the pages opened gave none. No pricing page; the platform is sold by quote, and Calabrio products now sit under Verint.
- 12
Intryc is twelfth because the gaps outweigh the product detail on the pages. It lists AI scorecards, AutoQA, coaching, simulations and reporting, and shows SOC 2 and GDPR badges. There is no price, only Intercom is named as an integration, and the privacy policy says it trains AI models on information from clients' end users, which a buyer must check against the contract.
Strong on
- AutoQA audits every conversation with AI scorecards and smart sampling
- Coaching and Training and Simulations modules link evaluation to practice
Weak on
- Privacy policy says end-user interaction data trains Intryc's AI models
- Pricing and integrations pages return errors; only Intercom is named
Skip it if: Teams that cannot accept AI training on their customers' conversation data, or that run a non-Intercom helpdesk. No pricing page; the homepage offers only a demo booking.
- 13
Cresta ranks last in this list because the pages offer the least to check. Quality Management, Coach, Training Simulator, AI Analyst and Automation Discovery are listed as modules. No prices, certifications, retention, hosting or training statements appear on the homepage or privacy notice, and the integrations page names no products. The module set may be strong, but a buyer cannot verify it from public pages.
Strong on
- Lists Quality Management, Coach, Training Simulator, Insights and AI Analyst as modules
- Coaching plans are visible to agents, per the homepage
Weak on
- No certifications, retention or hosting statements on the pages opened
- Quality Management is one module and per-module availability is not published
Skip it if: Buyers who must verify certifications and pricing from public pages before a first call. No price list; the pricing URL returns an error and plans are not published.
How these AI contact center QA software were judged
How well does AI score a contact center conversation?
Scoring quality depends on whether the AI can explain a mark, not on the percentage of calls covered. EvaluAgent says its SmartScore line items carry reasoning and that fabrication detection flags bot answers that invent information. Zendesk QA shows the steps an AI agent took with feedback per step. Insight7, Convin, NICE, Verint and Enthu.AI all state scoring of every interaction. None of these claims was tested here. Run a calibration: take twenty calls your best reviewer already scored, let each tool score them, and count how many marks differ by more than one point on your own scorecard.
What does contact center QA software cost per agent?
Only a few vendors print a number. As of November 2026, EvaluAgent starts at $35 per user per month and $65 with conversation intelligence, billed per human seat. Insight7 lists Pro at $99 a month for 50 analyses, Business at $299 and Plus at $1,499, billed annually. Zendesk shows €19 per agent for Support Team, but the QA add-on price is not published. Convin offers a free quality management label and Enthu.AI a 14-day trial. Balto, Level AI, Cresta, CallMiner, NICE, Verint, Intryc and Observe.AI are quote only.
Who sees call recordings and do they train AI on them?
Recordings contain names, card numbers and health details, so the training statement matters. Insight7's privacy policy says it does not train its AI engine on your data unless you consent. Intryc's policy says it uses information from clients' end users to train its models. Level AI says third-party AI providers are barred from training on customer data. Convin says it uses anonymized data to improve services. Most other pages say nothing on training. Insight7, Convin, Observe.AI and CallMiner state SOC 2, and Convin, Observe.AI, CallMiner and NICE state ISO 27001.
How hard is it to leave a contact center QA vendor?
The switching cost sits in scorecards, calibration history and coaching records rather than in the recordings. Enthu.AI's privacy policy says call transcriptions and analysis are deleted about six months after cancellation, and its plans recur semi-annually or annually. Insight7 keeps deleted accounts for 30 days as backups and gives no refund for a paid period. NICE and Verint tie QA to a wider platform, so leaving means touching recording and scheduling too. Before signing, ask for an export of scorecards, scores and transcripts in a documented format.
Which QA tool fits my contact center?
Match the tool to the stack you already run. A Zendesk shop starts with Zendesk QA, while teams on Genesys, NICE CXone, Five9, Talkdesk or Amazon Connect find those names on EvaluAgent's integration list. Small teams with a handful of reviewers look at Insight7 or Enthu.AI, since a trial or free tier lets them test scoring on real calls. Regulated, large operations that want recording, QA and forecasting together look at NICE, Verint or CallMiner. Teams that want live prompts as well look at Balto, Cresta, Level AI or Observe.AI.
How to choose an AI contact center QA software in three steps
- Score the same twenty calls in every trial. Pull twenty recorded conversations your senior reviewer has already scored, including some that failed compliance, and run them through each shortlisted tool with your own scorecard. Count disagreements of more than one point and note whether the tool explains each mark. EvaluAgent advertises reasoning on its SmartScore items and Enthu.AI offers a 14-day trial with a 30-day proof of concept on request, so both give you a way to test. Skip any vendor that will only show a scripted demo.
- Check the telephony and helpdesk connection first. List your phone system, helpdesk and CRM, then look for each by name on the vendor's integration page. EvaluAgent names Genesys Cloud, NICE CXone, Five9, Talkdesk, Amazon Connect, Salesforce, HubSpot and Zendesk. Enthu.AI names Five9, Talkdesk, Genesys, Avaya, RingCentral and Dialpad. Intryc names only Intercom, and Zendesk QA works inside Zendesk. A platform that is not on the list needs custom work, which Enthu.AI says it handles on request for VoIP systems it does not list, so ask for the effort and cost in writing.
- Ask for the training and retention answer in writing. Send each vendor three questions: is customer audio or text used to train any model, how long recordings and transcripts stay after cancellation, and which region stores them. Pages give uneven answers: Insight7 states no training without consent, Intryc states training on end-user data, and Cresta, Verint and Balto state little on retention. Redaction matters too, since Insight7 lists PII and PHI redaction from Business and Enthu.AI states automatic PII, PCI and PHI redaction. Put the answers into the contract.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best AI contact center QA software in 2026?
EvaluAgent ranks first here because it prints seat prices from $35 per user per month, scores every conversation against custom scorecards and lists SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001. Insight7 suits small teams that want a free tier, and Zendesk QA suits teams that already run Zendesk Support.
Can AI score every call instead of a sample?
Most vendors on this list say so. EvaluAgent, Zendesk QA, Convin, Verint, NICE, Level AI and Intryc all describe scoring or auditing every conversation. The claim is about coverage, not accuracy, so test each tool against calls your reviewers already marked before you drop manual sampling entirely.
Is there free contact center QA software?
Not many. Insight7 lists a free plan for up to five text files under 10MB, Convin labels its quality management software as free in its navigation without printed terms, and Enthu.AI gives a 14-day trial with no card. Zendesk QA says to contact sales for a trial. None of these free options covers a full call volume.
How much does contact center QA software cost?
Printed prices start at $35 per user per month for EvaluAgent and $99 a month for Insight7 Pro. Zendesk shows €19 per agent for its base Support plan, but the QA add-on needs a quote. Ten of the thirteen vendors here publish no figure, so expect a demo and a custom quote for volume.
Which tools also work as real-time agent assist?
Balto, Level AI, Cresta, Observe.AI, Convin, Insight7 and NICE list live guidance or assist features beside QA. Insight7 names AI Live Assist, Balto names real-time prompts on every call, and NICE names Copilot for Supervisors. A buyer who only wants post-call scoring can skip these and pay less.
Does QA software redact card and health data?
Some do. Insight7 lists PII and PHI redaction from the Business plan, Enthu.AI states automatic redaction of PII, PCI and PHI, and EvaluAgent lists PII redaction with custom rules. Pages for several others did not mention redaction, so ask before sending recordings that contain payment or medical details.
Can these tools check an AI agent as well as a human agent?
A few can. Zendesk QA says it analyzes conversations from human agents, AI agents and BPOs, and EvaluAgent lists bot QA scoring, containment analysis and handover tracking. Observe.AI and Level AI also sell AI agents of their own. Ask each vendor how scorecards differ for a bot, since human criteria often do not fit.
Which QA vendors host data in the EU?
None of the pages we read named an EU data region. EvaluAgent says data stays in region without naming it, Convin names India and AWS, Balto names United States data centers, and Insight7 names AWS with subprocessors in the USA. An EU buyer should request a written hosting commitment from any shortlisted vendor.