M3 vs. X-CD
A side-by-side comparison based on G2 review data.
| Metric | M3 | X-CD |
|---|---|---|
| Overall rating | 3.9 | 4.8 |
| Review count | 10 | 10 |
| Ease of use | 7.7 | 9.1 |
| Ease of setup | 6.3 | 8.8 |
| Quality of support | 7.9 | 9.6 |
| Meets requirements | 8.1 | 9.6 |
| NPS | 50 | 100 |
| Small Business | 40.0% | 80.0% |
| Mid-Market | 50.0% | 20.0% |
| Enterprise | 10.0% | 0.0% |
| Total page views | 47 | 134 |
| Total LLM citations | 31 | 11 |
M3
A member management solution with features for application management, member profiles, attendance & scheduling, and more.
X-CD
Most academic research and medical societies are running their operations on five different tools — a membership database, a separate abstract submission system, a conference registration platform, a peer review tool, and a proceedings publisher. Each was signed at a different time, with a different vendor, and the data moves between them through CSV exports and a staff member who knows where the bodies are buried. X-CD replaces all of it.