| Core Identity |
| Developer | Corteva, Inc. | Field Margin Ltd | Telus Ag and Consumer Goods | Agworld Pty Ltd | Syngenta Digital LTDA | Pasturemap Inc. | Ag Leader Technology | AgriWebb | WESLEY DEAN ARCHER | Gallagher Group Ltd |
| Category | Business | Productivity | Productivity | Productivity | Business | Business | Productivity | Productivity | Business | Productivity |
| Platform | iOS, Android | iOS, Android | iOS, Android | iOS, Android | iOS | iOS, Android | iOS, Android | iOS, Android | iOS | iOS, Android |
| Store Metrics |
| Rating | 0.0 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 | 3.5 / 5 | 4.6 / 5 | 4.4 / 5 | 2.9 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 | 5.0 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Ratings Count | 0 | 99 | 43 | 215 | 10 | 18 | 12 | 13 | 1 | 4 |
| Price | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free | Free |
| Release Date | Apr 8, 2026 | Jan 26, 2017 | Oct 26, 2013 | Nov 8, 2013 | Dec 6, 2021 | Aug 24, 2023 | Apr 15, 2019 | May 3, 2017 | Feb 24, 2026 | Feb 4, 2021 |
| Last Updated | May 6, 2026 | Apr 30, 2026 | Jan 9, 2025 | Mar 20, 2026 | Apr 14, 2026 | Apr 28, 2026 | Nov 11, 2025 | May 7, 2026 | May 10, 2026 | May 12, 2026 |
| Sentiment & Reviews |
| Sentiment | - | mixed | mixed | mixed | - | negative | mixed | - | - | - |
| Score | - | 60/100 | 45/100 | 45/100 | - | 30/100 | 55/100 | - | - | - |
| Praises | - | | - Grid soil sampling functionality provides significant operational efficiency for large scale agricultural land management
| - Accurate crop management documentation provides reliable records for agricultural operations
| - | - Map overview functionality provides clear visibility into rest days for pasture management
| - Agronomic data review and equipment tracking provide value for field operations
| - | - | - |
| Complaints | - | | - Frequent application crashes during data entry cycles disrupt critical field scouting and sampling workflows
| - Complex harvest input workflows increase time spent on manual data entry
| - | - Navigation and editing complexity in the latest version hinders core pasture management workflows
| - Login errors and connectivity failures prevent data access in the field
- Outdated interface design makes the application difficult to navigate for users
| - | - | - |
| Requests | - | | - Visual field mapping improvements to match specific agricultural technology color coding standards
| - Integrated hardware scanning and image capture tools for faster product entry
| - | - Search functionality for gates and fencers is required to improve navigation efficiency
| - Localized language support for Japanese users to improve regional usability
| - | - | - |
| Strategic Intel |
| Strengths | - Proprietary agronomic research data informs high-accuracy field planning.
- Multi-brand machinery integration creates a high-utility data hub.
| - Unlimited team access drives B2B network effects
- John Deere integration creates high switching costs
| - agX Platform integration creates high switching costs for enterprise-level agronomists
- Offline-first architecture ensures utility in remote, low-connectivity agricultural zones
| - Audit-ready database structure ensures regulatory compliance
- Collaborative platform design creates stakeholder network effects
| - Syngenta-backed data integration provides deep financial ROI views
- Regulatory reporting module automates compliance for large-scale operations
| - Offline GPS mapping ensures utility in remote field environments
- Grazing charting functions as a paid-tier gate for Pro subscribers
| - Third-party data integration reduces switching costs for mixed-fleet operators
- Remote display access provides a direct B2B revenue gate
| - Interactive map-based interface simplifies paddock management for non-technical users
- Unlimited user access model removes friction for team-wide adoption
| - Offline GPS mapping functions as a critical utility in remote field environments
- Cattle-centric UI provides a lower learning curve than general-purpose farm managers
| - Proprietary hardware-sync creates high switching costs
- Automated compliance reporting functions as regulatory moat
|
| Weaknesses | - Zero-revenue model lacks a direct path to self-sustaining product development.
- UI accessibility lags behind visual-first competitors like fieldmargin.
| - Offline sync reliability issues
- Lack of automated regulatory reporting
- High Pro-tier pricing relative to manual-entry utility
| - Frequent application crashes during data entry cycles
- 3.51-star rating indicates professional reliability concerns
- Sync failures prevent consistent data sharing with clients
| - Complex harvest input workflows increase manual entry time
- Synchronization delays disrupt field operations
| - Gated AgriEdge partnership restricts user acquisition
- 10 total ratings indicate low platform visibility
- Lacks native equipment-telemetry integration
| - Data-loss reports following the latest update
- Geometric drawing limitations in pasture subdivision
- 0.86★ Android-iOS rating gap
| - Login failures and GPS inaccuracy hinder daily field use
- Interface design is described as clunky and outdated
| - No direct EID reader integration for automated data entry
- Lack of automated compliance reporting for regional agricultural standards
| - Premium tier absent despite operational costs
- No team-based collaboration features for multi-person ranching operations
- 0 reviews indicate low social proof for new users
| - Zero Android rating count indicates poor adoption
- Lack of collaborative team features limits utility
|
| Pricing | free | subscription | subscription | subscription | subscription | subscription | freemium | freemium | free | free |
| Momentum | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance | Maintenance |
| Update Cadence | 2 versions, ~1d avg | 2 versions, 1 majors/6mo, ~7d avg | 2 versions, ~22d avg | 2 versions, ~6d avg | 1 versions | 2 versions, ~1d avg | 2 versions, 1 majors/6mo, ~168d avg | 2 versions, ~1d avg | 1 versions | 2 versions, ~4d avg |
