ReadSignFlow compared with Intulix
Most comparisons on a software vendor's own site are written to make the other product look bad. This one is not, because the honest answer is that for a lot of readers ReadSignFlow is the better choice, and saying otherwise would be easy to check.
They are the closest thing to each other in this space. Both hold a signed record against a specific version of a document, and both keep that record append only so it cannot be quietly edited later. That mechanism is not what separates them.
What they actually share
Both record who acknowledged which document, at what time, against which version. Both keep an append only log, so a record cannot be changed after the fact without the change being visible. Both treat electronic acknowledgement as valid under the ESIGN Act and state adoptions of UETA, which is the standard position in the United States for internal training records.
If the only thing you need is a signed receipt tied to a version, either one does that, and the rest of this page is about fit rather than capability.
Who each one is built for
ReadSignFlow describes its buyer as compliance, HR, risk and operations teams. That is accurate and it is the whole difference. It assumes those functions exist, that someone owns the policy library, and that there is an HR system worth connecting to.
A seven person plumbing shop has none of that. It has an owner who is still on tools two days a week, a dispatcher, and five trucks. There is no risk team, no HRIS, and no joiner and leaver process beyond a phone call. Software that assumes those things is not wrong, it is just describing a different company.
Intulix assumes the opposite. The person setting it up is the owner, doing it in the evening, and the person reading the procedure is standing on a roof with gloves on.
Side by side
| ReadSignFlow | Intulix | |
|---|---|---|
| Buyer it is written for | Compliance, HR, risk and operations teams | The owner of a trade shop, one to about forty people |
| Signed record against a version | Yes | Yes |
| Append only history | Yes | Yes |
| Procedures included | You bring your own documents | 36 written for plumbing, HVAC and electrical, 12 each |
| Photos inside the signed record | Not described | Yes, step photos are part of the content hash |
| Comprehension questions before signing | Read gate before signing | Questions answered before the acknowledgement is accepted |
| Delivery to the crew | Email, QR, portal, SMS and WhatsApp | Link and QR, no account needed to read or sign |
| Printable material for the van | Not described | Field cards with a QR code |
| HR system integration | REST API and webhooks, joiner and leaver automation | None |
| Pricing shape | Free below a headcount, then per company, then per employee | Per company at every tier, never per seat |
Where a row says not described, it means their public pages do not mention it, not that it is missing.
What you have to bring with you
This is the difference that decides it for most trade shops, and it has nothing to do with features.
ReadSignFlow is a delivery and evidence layer for documents you already have. If your policies are written, it puts them in front of people and proves they were read. That is genuinely useful when the binder already exists.
If nothing is written down, an evidence layer leaves you exactly where you started, because the hard part was never the sending. Intulix ships 36 procedures across three trades, which you edit into your own words rather than starting from a blank page. That is the reason it is specific to plumbing, HVAC and electrical instead of being industry neutral. A generic template does not know what a flare torque value is.
Price, plainly
ReadSignFlow has a free tier for small headcounts, and below that line it costs nothing where Intulix costs money. If you have a handful of employees, your documents are already written, and price is the deciding factor, that is a real answer and you should take it.
Above the free tier the shapes differ. ReadSignFlow moves to per employee pricing as you grow. Intulix is priced per company at every tier, which means hiring a fifth technician does not raise the bill. In a trade with high turnover that matters more than the headline number, because the bill stops moving every time someone joins or leaves.
Where ReadSignFlow is the better choice
Take ReadSignFlow if any of these describe you. You run a mixed workforce across several sites. You need documents pushed over SMS or WhatsApp. You have an HR system and you want joiner and leaver handling to happen automatically. You operate in the EU or the UK and need eIDAS rather than ESIGN. Your policy library already exists and the missing piece is distribution and proof.
Those are not small things, and none of them are on the Intulix roadmap.
Where Intulix is
Take Intulix if you are a trade contractor between one and forty people, there is no compliance function because there is no room for one, and the honest state of your documentation is a binder that is three years old or nothing at all. If the question you are actually trying to answer is whether you can prove a named technician read a specific version before he went on that roof, that is the only question this was built for.
The printable acknowledgement form is free either way, including the version field that most templates leave out. Take it and use it on paper if neither product fits yet.
Keep the record, not just the paperwork
Copy any procedure on this site into your own documents at no cost. What Intulix sells is the part underneath: a signed, dated, version locked record of which technician read which version, exportable when someone asks. Start free or see pricing from $59 a month.
Related reading: when Trainual does not fit a trade shop, how to prove employee safety training, and what an inspector asks for.