We tested six leading video conferencing platforms on call quality, screen sharing, recording, and collaboration features to help you run better meetings.
Video conferencing is no longer a pandemic stopgap — it's how modern teams communicate. But the differences between platforms go far beyond video quality. Meeting scheduling, screen sharing, recording, AI summaries, and breakout rooms can make or break your meeting culture.
We tested six major video conferencing platforms across real-world scenarios: one-on-ones, team standups, client presentations, webinars, and all-hands meetings with 50+ participants. We evaluated video and audio quality, reliability, feature depth, and how each tool integrates with existing workflows.
Whether you're a remote team running daily standups or an enterprise hosting company-wide town halls, this guide covers the tradeoffs you need to understand.
Ranked by overall score across features, ease of use, value, and support.
Side-by-side breakdown of capabilities and pricing.
| Tool | Score | Tool | Score | Free Limit | Max Participants | Recording | Price | Starting Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zoom | 4.8 | 40 min | 1000 | Yes | Visit ↗ | ||||
| Google Meet | 4.5 | 60 min | 500 | Paid only | Visit ↗ | ||||
| Microsoft Teams | 4.4 | 60 min | 300 | Yes | Visit ↗ | ||||
| Webex | 4.1 | 40 min | 1000 | Yes | Visit ↗ | ||||
| Whereby | 3.9 | 45 min | 200 | Pro only | Visit ↗ | ||||
| Around | 3.7 | Unlimited | 50 | Paid only | Visit ↗ |
Key factors to consider before committing to a platform.
Transparent, data-driven methodology.
Every tool on Tool Auditor is evaluated through a rigorous multi-factor analysis. We combine hands-on testing with aggregated user data, pricing analysis, and feature audits to produce scores that reflect real-world value — not marketing claims.
Our scoring weights: Features (35%), Ease of Use (25%), Value for Money (25%), and Support & Documentation (15%). Scores are recalculated quarterly as tools ship updates and pricing changes.