4 Signs You've Outgrown Whova
Whova may have worked well in the past, but your events have evolved.
What once felt like an “all-in-one” solution can start to feel limiting as programs scale, teams expand, and expectations increase. Most event teams don’t leave Whova because it fails—they move on because their events are doing more than Whova was built to handle.
Here are four clear signs you’ve outgrown Whova, and what teams typically look for next.
1. You Need Real Badge Printing and Onsite Logistics
Once your events become fully in-person—or even hybrid—onsite execution is no longer optional. Check-in speed, badge accuracy, access control, and the ability to make last-minute changes all directly impact the attendee experience.
Whova can generate badges and QR codes, but it does not offer native badge printing or onsite logistics infrastructure. Teams often depend on third-party tools, spreadsheets, or external vendors to manage printing and check-in. That adds risk, cost, and coordination overhead, especially at large or fast-moving events.
InEvent is built with onsite execution as a core requirement. Native badge printing, configurable badge templates, real-time check-in, session access control, and hardware compatibility, such as Zebra printers, are built into the platform. For teams running conferences, field events, or internal summits, this capability alone is often the reason they switch.
2. You’re Running Multiple Events Each Quarter
Whova works well for one-off or occasional events. But when your calendar fills up with quarterly roadshows, monthly webinars, internal town halls, or customer workshops, limitations start to appear.
Rebuilding agendas, registration pages, emails, and apps for every event consumes time. Managing access for multiple organizers becomes difficult. Pricing models tied to individual events or fixed plans don’t always scale cleanly as volume increases.
InEvent is designed for event programs, not just single events. Teams can reuse templates, clone workflows, assign granular roles, and manage multiple live events simultaneously. Pricing can flex by admin seats or registrations, making high-frequency schedules easier to plan and justify.
If your events feel operationally repetitive but strategically distinct, you’ve likely outgrown a one-event-at-a-time platform.
3. You Need CRM Data in Real Time, Not After the Event
Today’s event teams are measured by impact, not attendance. That means CRM data can’t live in spreadsheets or delayed uploads anymore.
With Whova, CRM integrations are often manual or rely on middleware. Registration and engagement data may reach Salesforce or HubSpot hours or days later, if at all. Session-level insights, intent signals, and real-time follow-up workflows are difficult to automate.
InEvent treats CRM synchronization as a core capability. Registration data, custom fields, attendance status, and engagement signals can sync in real time with Salesforce or HubSpot. This enables immediate follow-ups, cleaner attribution, and closer alignment between event teams and RevOps.
If sales or marketing teams are pushing for faster, richer data and your platform can’t deliver, that’s a strong signal it’s no longer keeping pace.
4. You Need More Control Over Branding, Roles, and Data
Whova’s mobile app is polished, but it remains Whova’s app. Branding options are limited, URLs are shared, and customization has clear boundaries. For community-led or academic events, that may be enough. For brand-sensitive organizations, agencies, or enterprises, it becomes a constraint.
The same applies to administrative control. Whova’s permission structure is relatively simple, which can be challenging when multiple teams, regions, or clients need access without overlap or risk.
InEvent offers full white-label control, including custom domains, branded websites, emails, registration flows, and mobile apps that look and feel like your brand—not your vendor’s. Admin roles can be scoped by event, region, or function, with clear ownership of data.
When brand consistency, compliance, or internal governance matter, surface-level customization isn’t sufficient.
