Research · head to head
Castor EDC vs Genedata
Castor EDC
Research
Electronic data capture and eConsent for clinical trials, built for investigator-initiated studies as well as sponsors
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Genedata
Research
Enterprise R&D data platforms for biologics, screening and bioprocess, owned by Danaher
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Castor EDC nothing is published: pricing is quoted only after a scoping call and protocol review, so budgeting a grant application means asking for a quote months before the study is funded and hoping the scope holds.; Genedata there is no entry level and no published price at any tier, so a mid-sized biotech cannot even establish whether Genedata is in its range without a lengthy sales engagement.
- They diverge on capability: Castor EDC covers Browser-based study build, Genedata covers Screener.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Castor EDC and Genedata actually diverge.
| Attribute | Castor EDC | Genedata |
|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Web, iOS, Android | Web, On-premise, Private cloud |
Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Research).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Castor EDC
- Browser-based study build
- 21 CFR Part 11 workflows
- eConsent
- ePRO and surveys
- Randomisation
- Per-study licensing
- Grant-funded pricing paths
- Data export
Only in Genedata
- Screener
- Biologics
- Bioprocess
- Expressionist
- Selector
- Profiler
- Instrument integration
- GxP-capable deployments
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Castor EDC
- An academic hospital running an investigator-initiated trial that cannot fund a sponsor-grade EDC contract or a data management CROnot Genedata
- A medical device company collecting post-market clinical follow-up data with Part 11 audit trailsnot Genedata
- A multi-site registry that needs remote eConsent because participants are recruited nationally rather than at a clinicnot Genedata
- A biotech running a small phase two study that wants the database built by its own clinical team in weeks rather than commissionednot Genedata
Genedata
- A pharmaceutical screening group processing thousands of plates a week where manual QC and curve fitting no longer scalenot Castor EDC
- A biologics discovery team linking antibody sequence, expression and assay data across a campaign instead of in spreadsheetsnot Castor EDC
- A process development group standardising bioprocess run data across sites for modelling and scale-upnot Castor EDC
- A CRO delivering high-throughput screening results to sponsors that require documented, reproducible analysis pipelinesnot Castor EDC
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Castor EDC
- Nothing is published: pricing is quoted only after a scoping call and protocol review, so budgeting a grant application means asking for a quote months before the study is funded and hoping the scope holds.
- Price scales on protocol complexity rather than a simple unit, so two studies with the same participant count can be quoted very differently and there is no public benchmark to argue against.
- Modules such as eConsent, ePRO and randomisation are quoted on top of the base platform, so the headline EDC figure is rarely the number that appears on the final proposal.
- It is deliberately lighter than the full sponsor suites, so a study that grows into a global registrational programme needing integrated CTMS, safety, IRT and full trial supply management will need additional systems and the interfaces between them.
- Regulatory responsibility does not transfer with the software: the platform supports Part 11 compliant workflows, but system validation for your intended use, SOPs and audit readiness remain your obligation and your cost, which sponsors new to EDC consistently underestimate.
Genedata
- There is no entry level and no published price at any tier, so a mid-sized biotech cannot even establish whether Genedata is in its range without a lengthy sales engagement.
- Platforms are licensed individually and most organisations need two or three, so the real contract is a sum of separate licences plus the integration work between them.
- Deployment is a services programme rather than an installation, running months and requiring scientific configuration by the vendor, which means value arrives long after the first invoice.
- Danaher ownership since 2023 gives the roadmap a natural pull toward Danaher instrument and bioprocessing lines, which is an advantage on that hardware and a question to ask if your instrument estate is from competitors.
- Validated deployments for regulated use add scope, cost and an ongoing revalidation obligation on your side after each vendor release, and that recurring internal effort is rarely counted in the business case.
Pricing, plan by plan
Castor EDC
On request- Castor EDC$undefined/year
- Priced per study on protocol complexity, duration, sites and modules
- 21 CFR Part 11 and ICH GCP workflows
- eConsent, ePRO and randomisation modules quoted separately
Genedata
On request- Genedata platform licence$undefined/year
- Each platform, such as Screener or Biologics, licensed separately
- Annual enterprise subscription scoped on users, sites and data volume
- Implementation and scientific configuration services quoted as a separate programme
Which should you pick?
Choose Castor EDC if
- You need browser-based study build.
- You work on Web, iOS, Android.
- You also want 21 cfr part 11 workflows.
Choose Genedata if
- You need screener.
- You work on Web, On-premise, Private cloud.
- You also want biologics.
Questions people ask
- Is Castor EDC or Genedata better?
- Neither clearly leads. Castor EDC starts at On request and Genedata at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Castor EDC or Genedata?
- Castor EDC starts at On request and Genedata at On request.
- Does Castor EDC or Genedata run on more platforms?
- Castor EDC runs on Web, iOS, Android. Genedata runs on Web, On-premise, Private cloud.
- What is Castor EDC best used for?
- Castor EDC is most often used for an academic hospital running an investigator-initiated trial that cannot fund a sponsor-grade edc contract or a data management cro, a medical device company collecting post-market clinical follow-up data with part 11 audit trails, a multi-site registry that needs remote econsent because participants are recruited nationally rather than at a clinic, a biotech running a small phase two study that wants the database built by its own clinical team in weeks rather than commissioned. Of those, an academic hospital running an investigator-initiated trial that cannot fund a sponsor-grade edc contract or a data management cro and a medical device company collecting post-market clinical follow-up data with part 11 audit trails are not what Genedata is typically brought in for.
- What can Castor EDC do that Genedata cannot?
- Castor EDC covers Browser-based study build, 21 CFR Part 11 workflows, eConsent, ePRO and surveys. Genedata covers Screener, Biologics, Bioprocess, Expressionist.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Castor EDC: Is there a free academic version?
No published free tier. There are academic, non-profit and grant-funded pricing paths, but each is quoted rather than self-service.
Genedata: Who owns Genedata?
Danaher acquired the company in 2023. It remains headquartered in Basel and continues under the Genedata name.
Castor EDC: Is it 21 CFR Part 11 compliant?
It supports Part 11 compliant workflows with audit trails and electronic signatures. Validating the system for your specific use remains your responsibility.
Genedata: Is there a small-team or starter option?
No. Everything is an enterprise contract scoped by users, sites and data volume, with services attached.
Castor EDC: Do I need a programmer to build a study?
No. Case report forms are configured in the browser, which is the main reason academic groups adopt it.
Genedata: Do I buy one product or the whole suite?
Each platform is licensed separately. Most customers license two or three and integrate between them.
Castor EDC: How long does a quote take?
Castor states a full pricing proposal within five business days of sharing the protocol.
Genedata: Can it be used in a GxP environment?
Yes, with a validated deployment contracted as additional scope. Ongoing revalidation after releases remains your responsibility.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Castor EDC vs Benchling
- Castor EDC vs LabVantage
- Castor EDC vs Sapio Sciences
- Castor EDC vs Medidata Rave
- Castor EDC vs REDCap
- Castor EDC vs Greenphire
- Castor EDC vs Florence eBinders
- Castor EDC vs Wolfram Mathematica
- Castor EDC vs LabArchives
- Castor EDC vs Aurelius
- Castor EDC vs Reduct
- Castor EDC vs OpenEye, Cadence Molecular Sciences
- Castor EDC vs Paperpile
- Castor EDC vs Remesh
- Castor EDC vs Schrodinger
- Castor EDC vs Suzy
- Castor EDC vs Terra
- Castor EDC vs LabWare
- Castor EDC vs Chemaxon
- Castor EDC vs Labguru
- Castor EDC vs TetraScience
- Castor EDC vs Thermo SampleManager LIMS
- Castor EDC vs Valispace
- Genedata vs Benchling
- Genedata vs LabVantage
- Genedata vs Sapio Sciences
- Genedata vs Medidata Rave
- Genedata vs REDCap
- Genedata vs Greenphire
- Genedata vs Florence eBinders
- Genedata vs Wolfram Mathematica
- Genedata vs LabArchives
- Genedata vs Aurelius
- Genedata vs Reduct
- Genedata vs OpenEye, Cadence Molecular Sciences
- Genedata vs Paperpile
- Genedata vs Remesh
- Genedata vs Schrodinger
- Genedata vs Suzy
- Genedata vs Terra
- Genedata vs LabWare
- Genedata vs Chemaxon
- Genedata vs Labguru
- Genedata vs TetraScience
- Genedata vs Thermo SampleManager LIMS
- Genedata vs Valispace