OTA Distribution (by Aven Hospitality) vs. Levart Channel Control:
Welke past bij u?

The Decision

Choosing a channel management system is critical for your hotel’s distribution strategy. Both Aven Hospitality's OTA Distribution and Levart Channel Control aim to connect your property to multiple booking channels, but they differ significantly in features, support, and market presence. Your choice hinges on which product aligns best with your hotel’s size, location, and operational needs.

Aven Hospitality’s OTA Distribution offers a well-established platform with a broad industry presence and extensive integrations, while Levart focuses on connectivity to key OTAs with a smaller, more streamlined operation. Which one will serve your hotel’s growth better?

Is Aven Hospitality or Levart Better for Hotels?

Both products aim to simplify multi-channel distribution, ensuring your rates, availability, and inventory are consistent across platforms. Aven Hospitality provides a centralized hub connecting to over 80 verified partners, including global OTAs, bed banks, and tour operators, making it ideal for hotels seeking comprehensive market reach. Levart, with around 13 verified partners, emphasizes streamlined connectivity primarily with popular OTAs and GDS, making it more suitable for properties prioritizing ease of channel access.

While Aven Hospitality boasts a higher review count (49 reviews, with recent data from the last six months), Levart has no recent reviews or detailed user feedback. This makes Aven Hospitality’s platform more proven and reliable for hoteliers needing current, actionable insights. Are you willing to rely on a smaller, less reviewed system, or do you prefer a more established platform with a track record?

Aven Hospitality vs Levart: Which Should Your Hotel Choose?

If your hotel needs a robust, internationally recognized channel manager with extensive integrations, go with Aven Hospitality. It suits large hotels, resorts, and properties in multiple regions, especially those requiring detailed reporting, inventory management, and support for multiple rate types.

If your hotel is smaller, operates primarily within a limited geographic scope, or values straightforward OTA connectivity, Levart might be better. Its focus on connecting with top OTAs like Booking.com, Agoda, and Airbnb makes it suitable for properties that want quick setup and reliable synchronization without extensive customization.

In essence, choose Aven Hospitality if you need a proven, feature-rich platform with global reach. Opt for Levart if your priority is simple, direct OTA connections with minimal complexity.

Is Aven Hospitality or Levart Easier to Use?

Aven Hospitality scores a 4.43 out of 5 for ease of use, based on user reviews highlighting its user-friendly interface and straightforward navigation. Onboarding is rated at 4.2 out of 5, with users noting a smooth setup process, although some mention the interface could be more intuitive for less tech-savvy staff.

Levart, with no recent reviews, has an unknown ease-of-use rating, but its small partner list suggests a simpler platform that might be easier for hotels prioritizing quick connections. However, without recent user feedback, it's hard to assess its actual usability.

Edge: Aven Hospitality.

Which Has Better Features: Aven Hospitality or Levart?

Aven Hospitality offers 10 shared features plus 4 exclusive ones, including an inventory grid, integrated payment processing, booking performance reporting, and support for weekly and monthly rates. These advanced features provide more control and insights into your distribution.

Levart provides 10 shared features and 2 unique ones, notably an analytics dashboard and unlimited channels without extra costs. However, it lacks some of the advanced management tools present in Aven Hospitality.

Overall, Aven Hospitality’s added features give you more options for detailed management and reporting. Edge: Aven Hospitality.

Which Has Better Customer Support: Aven Hospitality or Levart?

Aven Hospitality maintains a support rating of 4.06 out of 5, with reviews citing responsive account management and ongoing efforts to improve user experience. Nonetheless, some reviews mention slow responses and frustration with customer service, especially post-data migration.

Levart, with no recent reviews, offers an unknown support experience. Its small size suggests potentially quicker responses but lacks the verified support ratings to confirm this.

Edge: Aven Hospitality.

Which Has More Integrations: Aven Hospitality or Levart?

Aven Hospitality connects to 80 verified partners, including major PMS, RMS, and revenue management systems like Oracle, Mews, and TripAdvisor, offering broad compatibility. Levart, with only 13 verified partners, connects primarily with popular OTAs and GDS, including Airbnb and Agoda.

If extensive integrations are vital to your operations, Aven Hospitality’s larger partner network is advantageous. Levart’s narrower focus limits options but simplifies setup. Edge: Aven Hospitality.

Which Do Hoteliers Rate Higher: Aven Hospitality or Levart?

Aven Hospitality has a total of 49 reviews, with an overall rating of 0/5 and a high likelihood to recommend at 87%. Recent reviews highlight its ease of use, good onboarding, and reliable support, especially for larger or multi-property hotels.

Levart has no reviews or ratings available, making it impossible to assess user satisfaction or performance based on current data.

Edge: Aven Hospitality.

How Much Do Aven Hospitality and Levart Cost?

Aven Hospitality charges a flat monthly fee of $300, with no implementation fees or trial periods. Its pricing model is transparent and straightforward for hotels of various sizes.

Levart’s pricing is not publicly disclosed, and no trial information is available. Its smaller size and simplicity may imply a lower-cost setup, but this remains unverified.

What Type of Hotel Should Use Aven Hospitality?

• Hotels that operate across multiple regions or countries, needing broad international distribution.
• Large properties or hotel groups with complex inventory and rate management requirements.
• Hotels looking for detailed reporting and advanced management features.
• Properties that value comprehensive integrations and global connectivity.
• Hotels with dedicated technical staff or those willing to invest time in onboarding.

Not ideal if:

• You operate a small or boutique hotel with limited channels.
• Your team prefers a simple, straightforward OTA connection without extensive features.
• You have minimal IT resources or desire a plug-and-play solution.

What Type of Hotel Should Use Levart?

• Smaller hotels or boutique properties focusing on a few key OTAs.
• Hotels operating primarily in regions served by Levart’s partner network.
• Properties that prefer a lower-cost, simplified channel connectivity tool.
• Hotels that want quick setup and easy management without complex features.
• Teams that prioritize direct OTA synchronization over advanced inventory controls.

Not ideal if:

• You require extensive integrations with PMS, RMS, or other management systems.
• Your hotel operates across multiple regions requiring advanced customization.
• You need detailed reporting or revenue management features.

Aven Hospitality vs Levart: The Bottom Line for Hotels

Aven Hospitality’s OTA Distribution offers a comprehensive, feature-rich platform with extensive integrations, proven stability, and a large user base. Its higher review count and recent positive feedback make it a dependable choice for hotels seeking advanced management tools and global distribution.

Levart provides a focused, straightforward channel connection solution, ideal for smaller properties or hotels prioritizing simplicity and cost-efficiency. Its limited integrations and lack of recent reviews make it less suitable for larger or more complex operations.

If you want a proven, detailed platform with broad reach, choose Aven Hospitality. For quick, basic OTA connectivity with minimal fuss, Levart could meet your needs — but be cautious given the lack of recent user feedback.