My 8 Picks for the Best Online Reputation Management Tools

As a marketer, I’ve come to realize that no amount of clever branding can outweigh a bad online reputation. People trust other people more than they trust taglines.

That truth hits hard when you’re the one refreshing review pages before a big launch or wading through Reddit threads after a product update. Reputation isn’t just a PR problem; it’s a marketing reality. So, I decided to take matters into my own hands and evaluated over 20 online reputation management software to see which ones truly help brands stay ahead.

This list of the eight best online reputation management tools is based on hundreds of G2 reviews, exploring real-time review monitoring, scalable response management, and reporting features that give marketing teams the insights they need to protect and grow brand trust.

8 best online reputation management tools I recommend

Online reputation management encompasses everything from how your brand shows up online to how fast you respond to feedback and how consistently you build trust across every relevant channel.

That’s the lens I used while evaluating these best online reputation management tools. I wasn’t just looking for platforms that collect reviews or monitor brand mentions. I focused on how well they help teams stay proactive, not reactive. Were users able to centralize feedback across channels? Could they respond at scale without sounding robotic? Did the tools offer insights that shaped marketing strategy or just surface noise?

The tools that earned a spot on this list struck the right balance between functionality, flexibility, and usability, backed by patterns I saw across hundreds of G2 reviews.

What I prioritized when testing the online reputation management platform

I considered the following factors when evaluating the best online reputation management tools.

• Centralized review management: I prioritized tools that pulled reviews from key platforms like Google, Facebook, Yelp, and industry-specific sites into one place, making it easier to monitor sentiment and respond efficiently.
• Response automation and templates: For teams dealing with volume, I looked for smart reply templates, approval workflows, and auto-response options that didn’t sacrifice tone or personalization.
• Sentiment analysis and insights: It’s not just about stars and scores. The best tools helped marketers detect trends in feedback, track sentiment over time, and identify potential brand risks before they escalated.
• Multi-location and multi-brand support: For companies with multiple locations or sub-brands, I made sure the tools offered scalable dashboards, location tagging, and role-based access.
• Integrations with marketing and CX stacks: Whether syncing with customer relationship management (CRM) platforms, social media tools, or email marketing software, I gave extra credit to platforms that reduced manual work and brought reputation data into existing workflows.
• Reporting and stakeholder visibility: I looked for tools that offered customizable reports, whether for executives tracking brand health or social teams measuring review volume and engagement.

The list below contains genuine user reviews from the online reputation management software category page. To be included in this category, a solution must:

• Monitor online review sites for new and existing negative reviews
• Have a management platform to aggregate and interpret online reviews
• Create alerts and reports regarding a brand’s current online reputation
• Provide forms or a vehicle to garner new online reviews

*This data was pulled from G2 in 2025. Some reviews may have been edited for clarity.

Birdeye helps businesses monitor, manage, and grow their presence across review sites, social platforms, and listings. It consolidates customer feedback, streamlines response workflows, and offers automation tools to help brands stay on top of their public image.

One of the strongest points that stood out during my evaluation was how Birdeye brings all review activities into one place. Whether it’s reviews on Google, Facebook, or other third-party platforms, I saw consistent praise for how easily teams could respond, track sentiment, and assign ownership, all within a unified dashboard. For marketers managing dozens of listings, that level of consolidation is a huge time-saver. It also reduces the risk of missing negative feedback or delayed responses, which can damage brand trust.

Another highlight is how Birdeye is layering in AI across its platform. Features like automated review requests, sentiment tagging, and intelligent alerts help teams do more with less manual input. These tools don’t just make workflows faster; they help ensure timely and relevant responses, which is especially useful for teams managing high review volume.

The third major advantage is usability. Users repeatedly described Birdeye as “easy to use” or “straightforward.” The dashboard is clean, the navigation is intuitive, and most features are accessible without a steep learning curve, according to G2 reviews. Even teams without much technical expertise could confidently jump in and start managing their reviews.

That said, a few friction points did emerge in the reviews. The most common one was around session timeouts: users noted being logged out too frequently, especially when multitasking or jumping back into the platform after a break. While not a major blocker, this added minor frustration to smooth workflows.

A few users also mentioned that pulling comprehensive reports or customizing dashboards wasn’t always as flexible as they’d like. These aren’t critical flaws, but it is worth noting if your team relies heavily on tailored reporting.

What I dislike about Birdeye:

• A few users mentioned getting logged out more often than they’d like, especially after short periods of inactivity. I imagine that being an issue when firing multiple review responses.
• Some reviewers pointed out that reporting and integrations didn’t go as deep as expected. If your team relies on detailed dashboards or syncing across tools, I could see that causing some friction.

What G2 users dislike about Birdeye:

“The main dislike about Birdeye is the AI feature’s inability to learn your company’s brand voice over time. The responses it provides do not always align with our brand voice, so this feature isn’t helpful for us.”

– Birdeye Review, Grace F.

Reputation is built around the idea that “reputation” is more than star ratings; it’s about experience, responsiveness, and consistency across every touchpoint.

One of Reputation’s standout strengths is its ability to centralize review management. Users consistently mentioned how easy it was to view, respond to, and analyze reviews from multiple platforms without jumping between interfaces.

Another strength is how approachable the platform feels. Many reviewers praised its clean layout and intuitive navigation, which made onboarding much easier. I noticed that teams with shared responsibilities across support, operations, and marketing found the UI particularly helpful in keeping things efficient.

Reputation also goes beyond review sites by offering built-in tools for social media monitoring. This helps teams get a broader view of what’s being said about their brand, not just in formal reviews but also in social mentions and comments. I saw several reviewers highlight how this gave them early warning signs of sentiment shifts or potential PR issues. The social monitoring dashboard isn’t overly complex but provides just enough context to support more intelligent decisions.

Still, the platform isn’t without its rough edges. A recurring theme in reviews was that Reputation can feel slow at times, particularly when switching between dashboard views or loading analytics. It’s not something that breaks the experience, but it can be noticeable when you’re working through a long list of responses or reports.

Reporting capabilities also left some teams wanting more. While basic metrics and exports are available, several reviewers said they wanted deeper customization. It seems best suited for teams with straightforward reporting needs.

What I dislike about Reputation:

• The platform can sometimes load slowly, especially in more data-heavy areas. Several reviewers mentioned this, and I can imagine how it might interrupt a fast-paced review response workflow.
• Some users said the reporting features weren’t as deep, particularly when customizing dashboards. I can see that being troublesome if your team needs granular insights across different business units or markets.

What G2 users dislike about Reputation:

“Reputation is great, but sometimes the automation features may lack the personal touch that certain customers expect in their interactions.”

– Reputation Review, Sulma H.

SOCi combines social scheduling, review response, and basic performance tracking into one dashboard. It gives visibility into brand activity at a local level without losing control of the bigger picture.

What stood out most in user feedback was how seamlessly SOCi combines social media and reputation management. I came across many reviews from teams that rely on SOCi to post content across Facebook, Instagram, and Google while also managing customer reviews from the same place. Review response, post scheduling, and brand listening, all handled through a single login, definitely reduces the mental load.

I also found that SOCi’s reporting and location-based insights frequently appeared in positive reviews. The platform gives marketing teams a clear view of how each location performs, whether tied to review volume, sentiment trends, or social engagement. Users appreciated the built-in reports for surfacing what’s working and where attention is needed. It may not have the deepest customization options, but the core dashboards seemed to cover what most teams needed.

Another feature that received a lot of praise was the AI-assisted features and built-in creative tools. Features like suggested post times, auto-responses, and the Canva integration, which lets users build branded content without switching platforms, were repeatedly mentioned. These small touches help streamline everyday tasks and keep social output consistent. It’s not a heavily automated platform, but it does help.

That said, I noticed some repeated friction points around performance. Users mentioned that the platform could be slow to load, especially when working in the scheduling calendar or switching between modules. It’s not something that completely derails workflows, but it can slow things down when you’re trying to get a lot done simultaneously.

Customer support also came up as an area where experiences were mixed. While some reviews praised SOCi’s responsiveness, others described long delays or unresolved tickets. It seems that the quality of support can vary quite a bit depending on the issue.

What I dislike about SOCi:

• Slow load times and occasional refresh issues were mentioned more than once in the reviews. 
• There were also some mixed comments about support responsiveness. I can see how spotty assistance could create delays.

What G2 users dislike about SOCi:

“I would love to see more analytical features for monitoring social media campaigns and their success. Some integration with accounts could be a little simpler.”

– SOCi Review, Devin H.

Podium helps businesses connect with customers more effectively across reviews, text, and mobile channels. The platform leans heavily into conversational commerce and customer engagement, positioning itself as more than just a reputation management tool.

One of the most consistent positives I saw in user feedback was how Podium handles review management, especially with Google. Review invites can be sent via text, tracked from a central dashboard, and customized to fit different touchpoints. Several users noted how effectively it boosted response rates and improved their local SEO rankings. The integration with Google reviews, in particular, got a lot of praise, making it a go-to for businesses focused on visibility and reputation.

Text messaging is another big reason teams stick with Podium. The shared inbox setup makes it easy to manage back-and-forth communication with customers, whether requesting a review, answering a question, or following up after a visit. The ability to have meaningful conversations without relying on email or phone calls makes a real difference. For businesses that value quick, personal communication, this tool clearly delivers.

I also saw quite a bit of praise for Podium’s mobile app. Users described it as fast, easy to use, and just as functional as the desktop version. That’s not always the case with reputation tools, and it came up enough times to feel like a competitive edge. Being able to send messages, check reviews, or respond to customer questions on the go gives teams more flexibility.

The biggest pain point in reviews was around notifications. Several users mentioned getting overwhelmed by alerts or struggling to control which ones they see, especially in multi-user environments. In some cases, important messages got buried because there wasn’t a good way to prioritize or filter them. It’s an area where a little more customization could go a long way.

Reporting also came up as a recurring limitation. While Podium gives you access to basic insights, a number of reviewers said they wanted more advanced filtering, performance comparisons, or export options. The current dashboards might feel too surface-level for teams trying to track trends over time or report back to leadership.

What I dislike about Podium:

• Several users mentioned feeling overwhelmed by alerts or frustrated by the lack of filtering options. I can see that leading to missed messages or slower response times in busy inboxes.
• Reporting felt like another area that could use more depth. The current options might fall short if you’re trying to pull detailed trends or track performance across locations.

What G2 users dislike about Podium:

“Podium’s analytics dashboard is in need of more detail. Just like other insights, it provides good information, but sometimes I need more granular data that is not readily available. Customization options for automated messages are, albeit limited, not very flexible. Nevertheless, these issues are minor and do not stop the platform from being effective.”

– Podium Review, Enzo L.

G2 Marketing Solutions is designed to help software companies increase brand visibility, capture high-intent leads, and build credibility through real customer feedback. Most of the value comes from being discoverable in the right context: on category pages, in comparison grids, and through search results tied to buyer interest.

One of the most consistent benefits I saw in reviews was how effectively G2 Marketing Solutions boosts review visibility and category placement. Teams appreciated being featured in high-traffic areas where buyers are already comparing tools, especially when those placements are powered by strong user feedback. I came across several mentions of how this visibility helped users gain traction in competitive markets or reinforce credibility with new prospects.

Another key strength was the credibility that comes from G2 badges and Grid rankings. Several users mentioned how powerful it is to display a “Leader” or “High Performer” badge in email footers, sales decks, or landing pages. These assets do more than look nice; they provide third-party validation that buyers actually recognize. One review described them as “social proof that doesn’t need explaining,” and I can see why that resonates.

Users also appreciated the extended brand reach and awareness they gained from campaigns run through G2. Whether it was increased profile traffic, sponsored placements, or inclusion in email roundups, these features helped teams expand their audience beyond organic channels. I saw feedback from marketers who felt they were reaching new segments, buyers who hadn’t engaged through traditional advertising or paid search.

However, the user interface didn’t get all that praise. Some reviewers found it slightly unintuitive when trying to manage listings, customize reporting views, or track changes to rankings. It wasn’t a dealbreaker, but it did come up more than once. A few teams mentioned that the learning curve felt steeper than expected, with more frequent updates and new modules. More onboarding or in-platform guidance could make it easier to get the most out of the tool.

Cost was another recurring theme, especially among smaller businesses or teams with tighter budgets. While many users felt the investment paid off in visibility and lead quality, others felt the pricing structure could be a barrier to long-term adoption. Several teams recommended carefully evaluating usage and expected ROI before committing to a larger package.

What I dislike about G2 Marketing Solutions:

• Some users said the UI felt bulky when customizing dashboards or managing listings. I understand how that would slow things down for fast-moving teams.
• Pricing stood out as another consideration. For smaller companies, the cost might feel high unless there’s a very clear plan to maximize every feature.

What G2 users dislike about G2 Marketing Solutions:

“While the data is powerful, it can sometimes be limited depending on the volume of G2 visitors in your category. We’d love to see even more granularity in user behavior insights. Additionally, onboarding could be a bit smoother for first-time users — a more guided setup experience would help.”

– G2 Marketing Solutions Review, Alvaro G.

Thryv is an all-in-one business platform consolidating tools like CRM, calendar, review management, and messaging. While it’s not positioned as a pure-play reputation management solution, it includes several features that support customer interaction and feedback collection. For businesses looking to stay responsive and organized, Thryv offers a centralized space to engage with clients and track the full customer journey.

The first thing I noticed in the reviews was how often users described Thryv as easy to use. The platform’s interface seemed approachable even for users without a technical background, and most key tools were quick to set up. That simplicity appears to be a major selling point for busy teams who don’t have time for complex onboarding.

What also came through clearly was how much users relied on Thryv’s client communication tools. The built-in inbox, SMS support, automated reminders, and appointment confirmations were frequently praised. These features help teams follow up on services, request reviews, or reschedule appointments, all without leaving the platform. That kind of consolidation reduces back-and-forth and helps keep every customer interaction documented.

Another theme that stood out more than I expected was customer support. Several users shared positive experiences with Thryv’s onboarding and ongoing service. There were shoutouts to individual reps, references to quick responses, and feedback that support teams were patient and helpful when walking through new features. That level of human support seems to add a lot of value.

While users seemed to appreciate the platform’s all-in-one approach, some felt the cost was tough to justify if they weren’t using every feature. This was especially common among smaller businesses or solo users, primarily using it for communication and scheduling. It’s not that the platform lacks value; it’s just that the price-to-usage ratio felt a bit off for some teams.

A few users also mentioned missing or limited features that affected the tool’s flexibility. There were calls for deeper reporting, more template customization, or stronger integrations with third-party tools. For some teams, this meant needing workarounds or relying on manual processes in certain areas.

What I dislike about Thryv:

• Smaller teams often mentioned pricing, especially those using just a handful of features. I can see how it might feel like you’re paying for more than you need.
• There were also comments about limited customization or missing integrations.

What G2 users dislike about Thryv:

“The downsides of using Thryv are the costs. I know marketing does cost money, but that is the major pain point. The user interface is a little confusing, and to a small business owner, it could be overwhelming.”

– Thryv Review, Ronald L.

NiceJob’s core focus is review generation, primarily through automated email and text outreach after a customer interaction. The tool also offers integrations with CRMs and scheduling systems to simplify contact syncing and follow-ups.

The standout benefit I saw across reviews was how well NiceJob handles automated review collection. Once the system is set up, it sends out requests, nudges customers to respond, and directs them to platforms like Google with almost no involvement from your team. Users also appreciated how consistent the follow-ups were, which helped increase response rates over time. It’s one of those features that quietly runs in the background but makes a noticeable difference.

Another highlight was how quick and simple the setup process is. Reviewers often noted that they were able to get started without needing any technical help or custom development. Even the CRM integration and review widget felt straightforward to implement. It’s especially appealing for smaller businesses without dedicated tech support. I got the sense that the simplicity of the experience is part of what keeps people sticking with it.

Customer support also earned a lot of praise in the feedback I read. Several users mentioned fast responses, hands-on guidance during onboarding, and helpful follow-ups when something wasn’t working as expected. One reviewer even said the support team felt like a partner rather than a vendor. It’s clear the team behind NiceJob plays an active role in helping users succeed.

On the downside, a few reviewers pointed out that NiceJob isn’t the most flexible platform for customizing widgets or automating more complex workflows. Several users mentioned the Engage widget specifically, saying it worked well but didn’t offer much visual or behavioral customization.

Pricing also concerned some users. A few reviewers felt they were paying for features they didn’t use regularly or that the subscription cost was high relative to the tool’s simplicity. While many still found the ROI worthwhile, others recommended doing a cost-benefit check before signing on.

What I dislike about NiceJob:

• A few users said they wanted more flexibility in customizing the widgets or review flows. 
• I also saw multiple mentions of price concerns, especially from smaller teams. If you’re only using one or two core features, the monthly cost might start to feel like a stretch.

What G2 users dislike about NiceJob:

“It may inundate our clients with too many texts about reviews and recommendations. That can be remedied by lowering the amount of review and recommendation requests going out to our clients, and spacing them further apart in time.”

– NiceJob Review, Carmen M.

Experience.com is aimed at teams who want to connect the dots between customer satisfaction and brand visibility without managing multiple tools.

The automation capabilities stood out in user feedback. Once set up, Experience.com takes over the heavy lifting, from sending review requests to following up and sharing results where it matters. This kind of set-it-and-forget-it approach is a clear win for businesses that want to build a steady stream of public feedback. Several reviewers mentioned that it helped them stay consistent without needing to assign extra resources to the task.

Another area that earned praise was the platform’s survey functionality. Experience.com lets users go beyond simple star ratings by collecting detailed feedback on service quality, customer satisfaction, and specific touchpoints. This adds depth to the insights teams can act on and helps identify trends over time. A few users mentioned that these internal surveys worked well alongside public reviews, creating a more balanced view of the customer experience.

Users also appreciated the integration capabilities, particularly with CRMs and review platforms like Google. The ability to trigger review requests based on completed services or transactions saves time and ensures outreach happens at the right moment. Reviewers mentioned how helpful it was to connect Experience.com to their existing systems and automate campaigns accordingly.

I also came across some frustrations with support and responsiveness. A few users felt that getting help for technical questions or setup issues took longer than expected. Others mentioned delays in getting clear answers. While this wasn’t the most common complaint, it came up enough to suggest room for improvement.

There were also mentions of linking and syncing issues regarding review requests and score reporting. Some users had trouble getting reviews to reflect accurately across platforms or felt the scoring system lacked clarity. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it could slow down efforts.

What I dislike about Experience.com:

• Several users mentioned slow or inconsistent support. I can imagine how that would slow teams down.
• There were also mentions of review links or score reporting not syncing perfectly across platforms. If visibility is a priority, I can see how that might feel like a stumbling block.

What G2 users dislike about Experience.com:

“Publishing images into Experience.com is cumbersome and frustrating. It’s better to post directly to other review sites than through Experience.com.”

– Experience.com Review, Logan J.

Looking to level up your customer engagement, too? Explore the best experience management software to turn feedback into action.