CQR PMS vs. Shiji Daylight PMS:
Welches ist das Richtige für Sie?

The Decision

When evaluating property management systems (PMS), your goal is to find a solution that streamlines operations, enhances guest experiences, and provides reliable support. Both CQR PMS by CQR and Shiji Daylight PMS aim to serve these needs, but they differ significantly in maturity, features, and market presence. CQR's offering is virtually unreviewed and lacks recent data, while Shiji Group's Daylight PMS boasts extensive user feedback, a broad feature set, and global deployment. Which aligns better with your hotel’s needs?

CQR PMS remains undefined in user sentiment and lacks recent reviews, raising questions about its viability. Shiji Daylight PMS, by contrast, benefits from a strong reputation, ongoing customer feedback, and a proven track record. Is your hotel ready to rely on a solution with active, recent user validation?

Is CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS Better for Hotels?

CQR PMS presents itself as a PMS solution with no recent reviews or user data, making it difficult to assess its actual performance or customer satisfaction. Its lack of publicly available features, integrations, or regional presence suggests it might still be in early development or very niche use, which could pose challenges for scalability or support.

Shiji Daylight PMS, on the other hand, has 32 recent reviews, a high overall satisfaction score of 74.69, and an NPS of nearly 9. Its cloud-native architecture and extensive feature list support complex hotel operations, from integrated CRS to guest profiles, online check-in, and detailed reporting. With a presence in over 18 countries and verified integrations with 64 partners, it clearly demonstrates a proven global footprint and operational robustness.

Given the robust recent data and large user base, Shiji Daylight PMS is a more reliable choice for hotels seeking validated performance and extensive features. Is your hotel comfortable trusting a largely unreviewed, untested platform, or are you better served by a solution with proven market presence?

Shiji Daylight PMS vs CQR PMS: Which Should Your Hotel Choose?

If your hotel needs a scalable, feature-rich PMS with a global track record, go with Shiji Daylight PMS. Its extensive suite of 98 features—including guest profiles, multi-lingual support, online check-in/check-out, integrations with CRS, and automation tools—makes it suitable for large, multi-property groups or hotels seeking comprehensive management.

If, however, your hotel only requires a basic or niche management tool, or if you prefer to experiment with a new vendor, CQR might seem appealing. But with zero recent reviews, no verified integrations, and unknown support standards, it’s risky for operational criticality or growth.

For most hotels, especially those requiring reliability, scalability, and support, Shiji Daylight PMS remains the safer, more proven option. The choice hinges on whether you prioritize a system with extensive validation or are willing to risk deploying an unproven platform.

Is CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS Easier to Use?

Shiji Daylight PMS receives a high ease of use rating of 4.63 out of 5, with reviews praising its intuitive interface, helpful training materials, and straightforward onboarding process. Many users mention how quickly their staff adapt and how the system simplifies daily tasks like reservations, check-ins, and reporting.

CQR PMS, with no recent reviews or user ratings, provides no data regarding usability. Its unclear interface and onboarding process could present significant hurdles, especially if your team is unfamiliar with complex PMS systems.

Edge: Shiji Daylight PMS.

Which Has Better Features: CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS?

Shiji Daylight PMS offers 98 features, including guest profiles, multi-lingual support, online check-in/out, integrated CRS, automated night audits, guest messaging, and more. Many of these features are absent from CQR, which has no verified features or integrations listed publicly.

CQR’s lack of features and integrations makes it unsuitable for hotels seeking comprehensive management solutions. Shiji’s expansive feature set and ongoing development support more advanced, scalable operations.

Edge: Shiji Daylight PMS.

Which Has Better Customer Support: CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS?

Shiji Group’s support ratings are high—4.53 out of 5—and reviews frequently mention supportive, professional, and responsive teams. The comprehensive training materials, smooth implementation support, and 24/7 assistance further underscore its commitment to customer success.

CQR offers no recent reviews, support ratings, or evidence of dedicated customer support. Unverified or unknown support could jeopardize critical operations during onboarding or troubleshooting.

Edge: Shiji Daylight PMS.

Which Has More Integrations: CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS?

Shiji Group integrates with 64 verified partners, including major booking engines, CRS, and other hotel technology providers. This extensive network enables seamless data flow, operational efficiency, and better guest experiences.

CQR PMS has no publicly listed integrations or verified partners, limiting its ability to connect with essential hotel systems or third-party tools. For a hotel looking to expand or optimize its tech stack, this is a significant drawback.

Edge: Shiji Daylight PMS.

Which Do Hoteliers Rate Higher: CQR PMS or Shiji Daylight PMS?

Shiji Daylight PMS has a notable NPS score of 8.94 out of 10, with recent reviews praising its user-friendliness, support, and feature set. Its user base includes luxury hotels, branded properties, and independent hotels, all reporting positive experiences.

CQR, with no recent reviews, ratings, or user feedback, cannot compete. The absence of recent validation makes it hard to gauge its satisfaction level or suitability.

Edge: Shiji Daylight PMS.

How Much Do CQR PMS and Shiji Daylight PMS Cost?

CQR PMS does not publicly disclose pricing details or trial options, making it difficult to evaluate its value proposition. Its cost structure, if any, remains unknown.

Shiji Group charges a base price of $1,200, with no ongoing monthly fees or implementation costs listed publicly. While this is an upfront investment, it covers a comprehensive, proven platform with extensive support and integrations, likely resulting in better ROI.

What Type of Hotel Should Use CQR PMS?

• Hotels that operate on a very small scale or niche markets and are willing to test new systems.
• Teams that prefer experimenting with unvalidated solutions without reliance on extensive support.
• Not ideal if your hotel needs proven reliability, extensive features, or global support.

Given the lack of recent data, CQR is most suited for experimental or early-stage projects, not operational core systems.

What Type of Hotel Should Use Shiji Daylight PMS?

• Hotels of any size seeking a scalable, feature-packed platform trusted worldwide.
• Multi-property groups requiring centralized guest data, automation, and integrations.
• Teams that prioritize user-friendliness, reliable support, and detailed reporting.
• Not ideal if your hotel is extremely small and only needs minimal management tools, or if you require a custom, regional solution without global compatibility.

Shiji Daylight PMS is suitable for hotels aiming for growth and operational efficiency.

Shiji Daylight PMS vs CQR PMS: The Bottom Line for Hotels

Shiji Daylight PMS is an established, feature-rich, and well-supported PMS with proven market success. Its extensive integrations, positive recent reviews, and global presence make it the logical choice for hotels of all sizes seeking reliability and scalability.

CQR PMS, lacking recent validation, features, or support data, remains an untested option with high risk. Unless your hotel is in an experimental phase or located in a very niche market, Shiji’s platform offers a safer, more comprehensive solution.

If your hotel values proven performance, ongoing support, and a broad feature set, go with Shiji Daylight PMS. If you’re exploring new software with no guarantees, CQR may be worth a trial—though the risks are significant.