Compare
SolidWorks Inspection vs InspectionXpert: the two defaults, compared.
The two OCR ballooning tools most shops evaluate first. An honest comparison, and the question neither datasheet answers.
Mavlon competes in this market, so read the table knowing that. Every claim below reflects each vendor's public documentation as of mid 2026.
Side by side
The comparison
| Criterion | SolidWorks Inspection | InspectionXpert (Ideagen QC) | Mavlon |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Windows desktop: SOLIDWORKS add-in plus PDF standalone | Desktop, with cloud options | Cloud, any browser |
| CAD dependency | Strongest inside the SOLIDWORKS ecosystem | CAD-agnostic | None; works from the 2D PDF |
| Ballooning method | OCR detection of dimensions, tolerances, GD&T | Smart Extract OCR | AI reads the full drawing, around 90 percent, rest flagged |
| Tolerance interpretation | Engineer applies notes, fits, flags | Engineer applies notes, fits, flags | General notes by size, fit classes expanded, flag notes mapped |
| Report templates | AS9102, PPAP, ISO 13485 included | AS9102, PPAP via large template gallery | Form 3 pre-filled; AS9102, Net-Inspect, PPAP dimensional |
| Measured results | Professional tier | Measurement import supported | Included; maps back onto the Form 3 |
| Licensing shape | Per seat, per year (publicly listed) | Per seat (via sales) | Priced to FAI volume, unlimited team access |
| Scanned legacy prints | OCR degrades on low-quality scans | OCR degrades on low-quality scans | Reads scans by interpretation, not character matching |
Vendor columns reflect public documentation as of mid 2026. Corrections: atishay@mavlon.co.
The decision factors
How to actually choose
Where do your drawings come from? If your own designers produce them in SOLIDWORKS, the Inspection add-in balloons with the model context right there, and that integration is its honest advantage. If your drawings arrive from customers as PDFs of unknown origin, that advantage evaporates and the two tools converge into OCR-over-PDF, where the standalone tools compete on template workflow.
Template culture. InspectionXpert built its base on report templates: if your customers each demand their own FAIR format and your quality system revolves around report layouts, its gallery is the deeper one. SolidWorks Inspection ships the standard trio (AS9102, PPAP, ISO 13485) plus a template editor.
Seat economics. Both charge per seat per year. Count the people who touch an FAI in a month, not just the one who owns the license today, because the license holder becomes the queue. If workload is lumpy, headcount pricing taxes the slow months.
What stays manual either way. Run one dense drawing through whichever you demo and time the part after ballooning: applying the general note by size band, expanding each fit class, chasing flag notes across sheets. Both tools call the job done exactly where that work begins.
What neither column changes
The reading is still yours
Both tools automate detection, and detection is real time saved. But an FAI afternoon is mostly interpretation: the ISO 2768 note governing 47 unmarked dimensions, the H7 that must become 9.000 to 9.015 in the tolerance column, flag note 6 on three features across two sheets. Neither datasheet mentions that work because neither product does it.
Mavlon does the interpretation itself: upload the PDF, get a Form 3 with tolerances already applied and the uncertain 10 percent flagged, in 2 to 3 minutes, priced to your FAI volume instead of your seat count. Compare the afternoon, not the datasheet. The first drawing is free, and it is a fairer test than any table on this page.
Demo both. Then run the same drawing through the third option.
Three minutes against your hardest print tells you more than two sales calls.
Upload a DrawingFirst drawing is free · No signup