Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Docmosis vs Windward Core comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Docmosis
Ranking in Document Generation Tools
3rd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Windward Core
Ranking in Document Generation Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Reporting (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Document Generation Tools category, the mindshare of Docmosis is 18.2%, up from 15.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windward Core is 16.0%, down from 31.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Document Generation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Windward Core16.0%
Docmosis18.2%
Other65.8%
Document Generation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1353672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Director at Seaglass Cloud Technology
Our customers' operations are made easier by having up-to-date messaging
We mainly use the PDF rendering facility. The combination of the MS Word template and the passing of a JSON data object into a single simple REST API call that returns a PDF document is exactly what we required. The ability to embed, and dynamically repeat, templates within each other is a very simple yet extremely powerful tool. The HTML rendering, in combination with our own AWS SES service, allows a very simple method of producing bespoke emails. The storage of templates within the product in a folder structure makes the rendering call simple and also allows for multiple environments to be catered for.
CH
Sr. Systems Analyst at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Strong layout and design capabilities; leverages every aspect available in Word-native formatting
The licensing key is a little bit twitchy. I'd like to see more HTML formatting support in templates. It has a basic stock of HTML formatting capability, but it doesn't have a rich vocabulary. I have to work around that sometimes. The help documentation and blog posts are extensive, but not always up to date. The error reports also need improvement. If you don't key it in right, it's a little hard to find the root cause. It gives you information as much as it can, but it doesn't really hone in and tell you explicitly what you should do to correct the problem.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Globally, the ability to create document templates in several formats by using a rich syntax is simple and clear to understand."
"To generate these same tabular formatted reports with a code-only solution would have taken a lot longer to implement than the Docmosis template-based approach. Docmosis templates were easier to design as we were able to use Microsoft Word to create them. The templates made it easy to make any changes to reports and provided flexibility in our design approach."
"The ability to embed, and dynamically repeat, templates within each other is a very simple yet extremely powerful tool."
"A new report’s template creation is very often manipulation of a user’s layout of a report. A report can be ready in a day or less, once stored procedures are created as per sections in the report."
"There is flexibility in laying out tables that is akin to UI front-end design."
"Since our initial development, this feature has required very little maintenance. And when changes are requested, it is rather easy to change a Word document template and new staff can be quickly trained to modify a report."
"The ability for users to have design and layout control is very important because it allows them control over the design and layout of their reports, without the help of IT."
"The quality of the layouts and designs is second to none. Windward's ability to help us generate templates, for which we can actually tag documents, is the key feature that we use."
"Windward helped automate reports which otherwise would have needed IT to create and maintain."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides good, dynamic document-generation performance and the documents are being generated reliably."
"Thanks to Windward, our documents need very few tweaks and are usually "customer-ready" right out of the box."
"We can develop any report at least five times faster.​"
"The most valuable feature is the fact that it uses Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel as base templates, so when you generate, it's easy for clients to upgrade, and maintain, and generate out either a PDF or an actual Excel spreadsheet."
"The most valuable feature is the Rich Text or TinyMCE in fields. For example, you have a text field but it is not a regular text field, it is a link. Inside this link, you can copy/paste everything: images, text, and tables together. After saving this field, you can pull it into the document."
 

Cons

"We are facing new challenges such as internationalization. The next big challenge will be to offer even more date formats and numbers that cover the majority of countries. It will be to also think about features, such as number to text conversion, or the reverse which is currently only available in English but is in great demand by our international customers."
"The challenge in usage when we developed the reports four years ago was the limited logic that can be applied to manipulate and display data. That functionality was largely transferred over to the database layer in creating the data output that was to be displayed."
"It would be great to have improved diagnostic and debugging tools. When report templates are complex, sometimes any minor modification needs to be thoroughly tested to ensure that it does not disrupt a previously designed template."
"Version control and restricted access to some users for template editing could be a useful addition."
"We would like to shrink these reports into one page, because there is a lot of free space on one page, but we cannot shrink it into the one page to be shorter. This is one thing we would like to change."
"It is software, so there are always times where things don't work. Most of the time issues happen when trying to move to a new version. There might be problems with reports that were created in an older version, so either we have to make a tweak to the templates or we report it to them and get them to make an adjustment to their software."
"There are some Excel formatting things that you lose when you implement a template: some default Excel validation scripts, macros. You could create them in Excel if you were just using Excel, but in creating a template that generates a report, some of those validation things are lost."
"The next release could benefit from a cloud-based environment."
"It needs better support for upgrades and more control over layout of elements. Upgrades tend to break existing output. Elements do not position where expected due to insertion of blank lines and page breaks. It takes time to fix these through trial and error."
"​The tool does not support macOS documents."
"It would be nice to have a black-and-white, ideal setup for servers, to maximize capabilities. We went through a lot of scenarios to get something that is scalable. An ideal AWS-package server setup could have saved us a lot of time. But I understand this is very company specific."
"There is always room for improvement in the speed, especially with the complex, multi-line Excel spreadsheets. They made some improvements in the last version that are quantum-fold faster than when I first started. But there is always room for improvement there. You always want reports faster and faster."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Price bands are based on pages so ensure you have a good understanding of this if documents are of variable length."
"Cloud and REST API models keep the setup costs low."
"The pricing is fair. The way that they have it priced is the Windward Designer has a price that's associated with it. Then, depending on the number of cores that you're looking for, that is the price that you pay. The more cores that you want, the more expensive it is."
"CapEx fits our requirements, OpEx is higher due to the 20% service and maintenance cost, where we normally pay 15%."
"We negotiated our prices many years ago, and while they go up a little bit here and there, they've been pretty steady."
"The pricing is very reasonable for what it provides. The report builder is about one grand per user... We are paying for a support contract, which is 20 percent of the price, but because the licenses are perpetual, I think the pricing is very reasonable."
"​They are fair and flexible. They are willing to work with your current architecture to make sure you have the best deal.​"
"The cost is reasonable."
"I can't advise anybody about pricing and licensing, but it was competitive. A lot of things we did look at were all volume-based, so it was a case of you buy a license to generate this many reports a year, and that's not something that I'm particularly interested in because it doesn't give you any idea - if we have future growth, or if we have a lean year - for budgeting reasons it's more difficult. With Windward it's a straight out license fee, whether we generate one page or we generate a million, it makes no difference."
"The only problem with the pricing of Windward is the limitation on the number of reports generated. It is costly in that sense. If you want to increase, you have to pay more, based on the number of reports generated per day. It is not the same with Crystal Reports. With the latter, you buy a license at one point in time and that's it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Document Generation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Marketing Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
 

Also Known As

No data available
Windward, Windward Studios
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

8th light, ACA IT-Solutions NV, Ageology, Anahata, Aprello, ATENA, ATICOM, Axon Ltd, BBC, Cellartastings SL, Cisco, Cisco Systems, Cityline HK Limited, Commerce, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Crane Technical Services, CyberSoft C/S, Dane Street, DBX Kft, Department of Education, Dream, Endless Pools, Formos LLC, Gappless, Genentech - Roche Group, Global Sage, Goco, Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG, Husbanken, Isell, Jim S Adler & Associates, Lane Nussbaum, Lift Forward, loc8.com, Merck KGaA, MercuryGate International, NoemaLife S.p.A, Pattersons Security, Practice Insight Pty Ltd, Procountor.com, Quasado GmbH, Rain Focus, RiseSmart, Russian School of Mathematics, Social Finance, Southern Careers Institute, STR Grants LLC, Sync International (UK) Ltd., Systemic Pty Ltd, Thales - Defence Australia, The Freshwater Trust, Tioth LLC, Todumo, TQM-Insight
HAL, Inc., Axe Group, White Clark Group, Blueprint Software, Aspect Security, Nucleus Software, LeBlanc’s Food Stores, South Sound 911, Aegon, Barclays, Fidelity Investments, ArisGlobal LLC, USDA, RepLink, AON Hewitt
Find out what your peers are saying about Docmosis vs. Windward Core and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.