Softwr

Research · head to head

Schrodinger vs Valispace

Schrodinger logo

Schrodinger

Research

Physics based molecular modelling and drug discovery software, licensed by token pool

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Valispace logo

Valispace

Research

Requirements and systems engineering for hardware teams, with published per-seat pricing

From
$999/year
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Schrodinger licences are sold as token pools rather than unlimited module access, so a department can be blocked mid campaign because colleagues are consuming concurrency, and expanding the pool is a new commercial negotiation rather than a setting.; Valispace the three-seat minimum means a solo consultant or a two-person startup pays for a seat nobody uses, roughly 3,000 US dollars a year before anyone logs in.
  • They diverge on capability: Schrodinger covers Maestro, Valispace covers Live requirements.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Schrodinger and Valispace actually diverge.

Attributes where Schrodinger and Valispace differ
AttributeSchrodingerValispace
Starting priceOn request$999/year
Pricing modelquotePer user per year
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, WebWeb, On-premise, API

Identical on both: 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 Schrodinger

  • Maestro
  • Glide
  • FEP+
  • Desmond
  • Jaguar
  • LiveDesign
  • Materials Science suite

Only in Valispace

  • Live requirements
  • Budgets and margins
  • Component tree
  • Verification and validation
  • Python API and Jupyter
  • ValiAssistant
  • SSO and MFA

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Schrodinger

  • A medicinal chemistry programme using FEP+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licencenot Valispace
  • A structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structurenot Valispace
  • A materials group modelling polymer or electrolyte properties before committing to formulation experimentsnot Valispace
  • A university modelling group that qualifies for the published academic site licence and needs Maestro across a teaching and research cohortnot Valispace

Valispace

  • A small satellite team keeping mass and power budgets live across a design cycle instead of rebuilding spreadsheets before each reviewnot Schrodinger
  • A drone manufacturer that needs requirement traceability for a certification authority but cannot justify an enterprise requirements databasenot Schrodinger
  • A university engineering department teaching systems engineering with real traceability under the flat education ratenot Schrodinger
  • An electronics-heavy hardware startup wanting requirements linked to the PCB design work happening in Altiumnot Schrodinger

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Schrodinger

  • Licences are sold as token pools rather than unlimited module access, so a department can be blocked mid campaign because colleagues are consuming concurrency, and expanding the pool is a new commercial negotiation rather than a setting.
  • Commercial pricing is not published and is negotiated against modules, cores and term, so two companies of similar size can pay very different amounts and neither can benchmark the other.
  • FEP+ needs substantial GPU capacity that is not included in the licence, so the real annual cost includes cloud or on premise hardware that often rivals the software line item.
  • The tools require trained computational chemists to produce trustworthy results, and an organisation without that function will generate predictions it cannot interpret or defend to its own medicinal chemists.
  • Schrodinger runs its own internal drug discovery pipeline alongside selling software to discovery companies, and some prospective customers treat that dual role as a conflict when discussing proprietary targets, which slows procurement even where contractual separation exists.

Valispace

  • The three-seat minimum means a solo consultant or a two-person startup pays for a seat nobody uses, roughly 3,000 US dollars a year before anyone logs in.
  • Ownership has changed twice in two years, from independent to Altium to Renesas by way of the Altium acquisition, and the technology has been repackaged as the Altium Requirements Portal, so the standalone roadmap is genuinely uncertain.
  • It is not a certified DO-178C or ARP4754 toolchain component in the way established requirements databases are, so highly regulated aerospace programmes may still need a recognised tool alongside it.
  • The parametric model rewards teams who structure their data properly at the start; teams that import a flat requirement list get a slower version of a document tool and none of the budget automation.
  • Integration depth outside the Altium and Jira world is limited, so linking to an existing PLM or a CAD-driven mass properties source usually means writing against the Python API yourself.

Pricing, plan by plan

Schrodinger

On request
  • Commercial licence$undefined/year
    • Quoted per customer against modules, cores and licence term
    • Applications draw from a shared token pool that caps concurrency
    • GPU compute for FEP+ and Desmond is a separate cost, on premise or cloud
  • Academic site licence$undefined/year
    • Published academic entry around 7,500 USD a year for a premium package with a token allocation
    • Restricted to academic and research use, not work supporting a commercial enterprise
    • Maestro generally unrestricted with tokens shared for compute heavy applications

Valispace

$999/year
  • Valispace$999/year
    • Minimum three users
    • Requirements, components, V&V and analysis modules
    • ValiAssistant AI beta
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • On-premise deployment option
    • Staging servers with controlled update timing
    • Advanced support terms
  • Education$1000/year
    • Flat annual rate for an institution
    • Unlimited students and professors
    • Non-commercial projects only

Which should you pick?

Choose Schrodinger if

  • You need maestro.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web.
  • You also want glide.
Schrodinger review

Choose Valispace if

  • You need live requirements.
  • You work on Web, On-premise, API.
  • You also want budgets and margins.
Valispace review

Questions people ask

Is Schrodinger or Valispace better?
Neither clearly leads. Schrodinger starts at On request and Valispace at $999/year, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Schrodinger or Valispace?
Schrodinger starts at On request and Valispace at $999/year.
Does Schrodinger or Valispace run on more platforms?
Schrodinger runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web. Valispace runs on Web, On-premise, API.
What is Schrodinger best used for?
Schrodinger is most often used for a medicinal chemistry programme using fep+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licence, a structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structure, a materials group modelling polymer or electrolyte properties before committing to formulation experiments, a university modelling group that qualifies for the published academic site licence and needs maestro across a teaching and research cohort. Of those, a medicinal chemistry programme using fep+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licence and a structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structure are not what Valispace is typically brought in for.
What can Schrodinger do that Valispace cannot?
Schrodinger covers Maestro, Glide, FEP+, Desmond. Valispace covers Live requirements, Budgets and margins, Component tree, Verification and validation.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Schrodinger: How is Schrodinger software licensed?

Annual licences with a shared token pool. Tokens cap how much you can run at once rather than which modules you own outright.

Valispace: Who owns Valispace?

Altium acquired it in December 2023, and Renesas Electronics acquired Altium in 2024. It is therefore a Renesas-owned product, despite frequent reports elsewhere linking it to defence groups.

Schrodinger: Is there published pricing?

Only for academic site licences, which start around 7,500 USD a year for a premium package. Commercial pricing is quoted.

Valispace: Is it the same thing as the Altium Requirements Portal?

They share a lineage. Requirements Portal is the Altium 365 packaging of Valispace technology. The standalone Valispace product is still sold with its own pricing.

Schrodinger: Do I need my own GPUs?

For FEP+ and Desmond in practice yes, or cloud GPU capacity. Compute is not included in the licence.

Valispace: What does it actually cost?

999 US dollars per user per year with a minimum of three users, billed annually. Enterprise with on-premise deployment is quoted separately.

Schrodinger: Does Schrodinger compete with its customers?

It runs its own drug pipeline as well as selling software. It manages this through contractual separation, but buyers with sensitive targets should raise it during procurement.

Valispace: Can it replace a requirements database like DOORS?

For small and mid-sized hardware programmes, often yes. For programmes with contractual tool mandates, no.

Share

Related pages

More on Schrodinger

More on Valispace

Keep looking

Other head to heads