Switching from Whova: what's different
Whova does event apps well. The mobile experience, attendee networking, live polling, session engagement — it's a strong product for the attendee-facing side of events. If that's all you need, Whova is a solid choice.
But most event teams need more than an attendee app. They need to manage exhibitors, coordinate speakers, track budgets, assign tasks, design floor plans, and communicate with a dozen different groups — all before an attendee ever opens the app. That's where the conversation shifts.
The event app vs. the production layer
Whova's core strength is the attendee experience. Personalised agendas, in-app networking, community features, live engagement tools. For attendees and sponsors interacting during the event, it works.
The gap shows up behind the scenes. Exhibitor compliance tracking, floor plan design, document management, budget oversight, task assignment, speaker material collection — these are the production workflows that consume most of an event team's time. Whova doesn't cover them, which means your team is filling those gaps with spreadsheets, email threads, and additional tools.
That's not a criticism of Whova. They built an event app, and they built it well. But an event app is one layer of event management, not the whole thing.
What changes when you consolidate
With ema, the production tools and the attendee-facing features live in the same system. Here's what that looks like in practice:
Exhibitor management gets a proper home. Instead of basic directory listings in the event app plus a spreadsheet for compliance tracking plus email for communications, exhibitors get self-service portals. They upload assets, submit compliance documents, manage booth details, and communicate with your team — all in one place. Your team sees compliance status across every exhibitor at a glance.
Floor plans are interactive and data-connected. Whova doesn't include floor plan design tools. Most teams end up in PowerPoint or a specialist tool, then manually keeping it in sync with booth assignments. ema's floor plan designer lets you draw booths, assign exhibitors, manage reservations, and publish interactive maps that attendees can actually use.
Speaker coordination is a workflow, not an inbox. CFP submissions, abstract review, acceptance notifications, material collection, AV requirements, schedule placement — it's one connected pipeline instead of a chain of emails and shared documents.
Tasks, budgets, and documents stay connected to the event. Generic project management tools don't understand event timelines. ema's task management, budget tracking, and document management are built around how events actually work — deadlines tied to event dates, costs tied to line items, documents tied to the people and things they relate to.
AI that has context. ema's AI agent can answer questions about your budget status, flag exhibitor compliance gaps, identify schedule conflicts, and draft communications — because it has access to all your event data in one place. When your data is spread across five tools, no AI can help you that way.
What you should check first
Whova's event app is mature and well-regarded. If your attendees rely heavily on Whova's networking features, community tools, or specific engagement formats, compare the attendee experience side-by-side before switching. Make sure ema's attendee-facing features meet your specific needs.
This is an honest trade-off. Whova has had years to refine the app experience. ema covers the full production lifecycle and includes attendee tools, but the attendee app layer is newer. Look at both and decide what matters more for your events.
The pricing difference
Whova uses custom per-event pricing. You get a quote for each event, and the cost scales with attendee count and features. For organisations running one or two events per year, this can be manageable. For teams running ten or twenty, the per-event model adds up quickly — and unpredictably.
ema packages start from $499/month, with no per-seat pricing and hard-cost services billed separately. For organisations running multiple events, the cost model is built around event operations rather than a fresh per-event quote every time.
The consolidation argument
The real question isn't whether Whova or ema has a better event app. It's whether you want to keep running Whova for the app layer plus separate tools for everything else — or whether you'd rather have one platform that handles both.
Fewer integrations to maintain. One source of truth for event data. Less context switching for your team. That's the case for consolidation, and it's the reason most teams consider making the switch.
Whova is a good product that does a specific thing well. The switch makes sense when you need production tools and attendee tools in the same place — and you'd rather not keep stitching separate systems together.