Latest L&D Playbook: The 2026 AI Buyer's Guide for HR and L&D Leaders Download Now
Login Help Careers

Litmos vs Ruangkerja

Litmos is built around quick compliance training and simplicity, whereas Ruangkerja is built around delivery to Indonesian workforces. Compared below on published capability, verified ratings and pricing structure. Disprz publishes this page and is left out of the capability table below.

Data reviewed 2026-09-15 6 sources How we compared these

See the verdict Book a Disprz demo
Litmos
4.3 G2, 698 reviews

Mid-market to enterprise (200 to 5,000). Compliance-heavy and partner-training use cases

Per-user tiers see pricing section

Ruangkerja
n/a No verifiable count identified

Mid-market to enterprise in Indonesia. Indonesian workforces across sectors

Quote only no public list price

Disprz
4.7 Capterra, 138 reviews

Positioning not verified from the vendor site.

Quote only no public list price

Key takeaways

Litmos vs Ruangkerja in five lines

  • Ratings
    No like-for-like rating comparison is possible. Ruangkerja: G2 (no profile on this site), Capterra (no profile on this site), Gartner Peer Insights (no profile on this site). Any score shown below stands on its own rather than as a comparison.
  • Shape
    Both state 1 of the 12 capabilities compared. Litmos states 8 that Ruangkerja does not, including: LXP: discovery, pathways, social learning; Reports capability gained, not completions; Frontline and deskless, mobile first.
  • Pricing
    Neither publishes list pricing. Both are quoted on headcount, modules and region, so ask each for a three-year total including content and services.
  • Rollout
    Litmos publishes no go-live figure. Ruangkerja publishes no go-live figure.
  • The gap
    Neither states 3 of the capabilities compared, including Third-party content marketplace; Publishes a weeks-to-live figure.

Which one fits

Pick your situation, get the honest answer

Every outcome below is also written out in text underneath, so nothing here is hidden behind the picker.

What is not working today
Who you are training
Live by

Best fit

Every outcome is written out below, so nothing is hidden behind the picker.

who you are training is Partners and customers

Litmos Litmos states partner and customer academies on its own site and Ruangkerja does not.

who you are training is Frontline and deskless

Litmos Litmos states frontline and deskless, mobile first on its own site and Ruangkerja does not.

who you are training is All of the above

Neither, on this one Neither is a full talent suite. If you want recruiting and performance from the same vendor, neither of these is the whole answer.

what is not working today is Completions, but no capability

Litmos Litmos states reports capability gained, not completions on its own site and Ruangkerja does not.

what is not working today is Cost and add-on creep

Litmos Litmos publishes at least part of its pricing and Ruangkerja does not, so you can sanity check one quote and not the other.

what is not working today is Admin burden on a small team

Neither, on this one Neither has a decisive ease-of-use advantage in the verified scores, so judge admin burden on a hands-on trial with your own team.

live by is This quarter

Neither, on this one Neither publishes a weeks-to-live figure, so treat any quarter-length promise as something to get in writing before you sign.

in general

Neither, on this one The two sit within a rounding error of each other on the verified sites, so the ratings will not decide this. The situational rows above will.

Pricing

What each one costs, and what moves the number

Neither of these is a rate card. It is how the quote is built.

Litmos

Read from the Litmos public pricing and product pages, September 2026.

Published tiers See vendor
Per-user tiers

Per-user tiers (Partly, tiers published); Free trial

Publishes at least part of its pricing, so you can sanity check a quote against it.
Ruangkerja

Read from the Ruangkerja public pricing and product pages, September 2026.

Quoted On request
Custom quote

Custom quote (No, quote only); Guided demo

No public list price, so the only way to compare is to ask for a three-year total.
Disprz

Read from the Disprz public pricing and product pages, September 2026.

Quoted On request
Priced on headcount and modules

No pricing model was verified from the vendor site.

No public list price, so the only way to compare is to ask for a three-year total.
Ask all of them the same three questions: the three-year total including content and services, what becomes a separate line item later, and what happens to the price when headcount moves.

Feature matrix

What each platform states it does

Each row records what the vendor publishes on its own site. A blank means not verified, never assumed absent.

Litmos and Ruangkerja compared on stated capability

Capability Litmos Ruangkerja
Core LMS: courses, compliance, certification ✓ ✓
LXP: discovery, pathways, social learning ✓ Not verified
Reports capability gained, not completions ✓ Not verified
Frontline and deskless, mobile first ✓ Not verified
Authoring inside the platform ✓ Not verified
Deep configuration ✓ Not verified
Partner and customer academies ✓ Not verified
Third-party content marketplace Not verified Not verified
Compliance and audit depth ✓ Not verified
Integrations ✓ Not verified
Publishes a weeks-to-live figure Not verified Not verified
Full talent suite Not verified Not verified
Compare with Disprz Compare with Disprz

Swipe sideways to see both columns.

Deep dive

Where the two actually differ

Three areas that decide most shortlists.

Scope of the contract

Litmos

Litmos states 9 of the 12 capabilities compared here, including authoring inside the platform.

Ruangkerja

Ruangkerja states 1 of the 12 capabilities compared here, including core lms: courses, compliance, certification.

Disprz

Disprz states 7 of the 12 capabilities compared here, including authoring inside the platform.

Evidence base

Litmos

4.3 out of 5 across 1,134 reviews on the verified sites.

Ruangkerja

No verifiable rating was identified on any of the three sites.

Disprz

4.7 out of 5 across 238 reviews on the verified sites.

What reviewers complain about

Litmos

Reporting Issues (31), Poor Reporting (31), Inadequate Reporting (25), Limited Customization (20)

Ruangkerja

No criticism tags were captured for this vendor.

Disprz

Navigation Difficulties (2), Limited Search Functionality (1), Integration Issues (1), Inadequate Search Functionality (1)

What reviewers say

Ratings and reviewer sentiment

Scores and tag counts were read from each vendor profile by hand and screenshotted on 15 September 2026.

Litmos
G2 4.3 (698)
Capterra 4.2 (385)
Gartner Peer Insights 4.4 (51)
Praised for: Ease of Use (78), Customer Support (48), Features (42), Course Creation (37), Intuitive (34). Criticised for: Reporting Issues (31), Poor Reporting (31), Inadequate Reporting (25), Limited Customization (20), Feature Issues (18). Some users note that reporting capabilities could be improved, as they find it somewhat limited.

Read the profiles G2 Capterra Gartner Peer Insights

Compare with Disprz
Ruangkerja
G2 No verifiable count identified
Capterra No verifiable count identified
Gartner Peer Insights No verifiable count identified
No pros and cons panel was captured for this vendor.
Compare with Disprz
Disprz
G2 4.4 (94)
Capterra 4.7 (138)
Gartner Peer Insights 4.9 (6)
Ease of use (Capterra) 4.7
Customer service (Capterra) 4.6
Praised for: E-Learning (3), Ease of Use (3), Sharing (2), Modules (2), Certifications (1). Criticised for: Navigation Difficulties (2), Limited Search Functionality (1), Integration Issues (1), Inadequate Search Functionality (1), Expensive (1). Integration with external tools can be complex.

Read the profiles G2 Capterra Gartner Peer Insights

Book a Disprz demo

Decision table

If this is your situation, pick this

Read across the row.

If this is you Pick Why
LXP: discovery, pathways, social learning Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Reports on capability gained, not completions Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Frontline and deskless, mobile first by design Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Built-in authoring Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Depth of admin configurability Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Extended enterprise: partner and customer academies Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
Multi-region regulated compliance depth Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.
HRIS, SSO and API integration Litmos Litmos states it; Ruangkerja's site does not.

Both fall short

What neither one does

Neither Litmos nor Ruangkerja states 2 of the capabilities compared, including Large third-party content marketplace, Recruiting, performance and succession in one contract. Neither replaces your HRIS or payroll. If the brief is one system for the whole employee lifecycle, both are the wrong shortlist and a suite vendor is the right one.
Neither Third-party content marketplace
Neither Publishes a weeks-to-live figure
Neither Full talent suite

Capability rows record published claims, not test results.

Verdict

So which one should you buy?

Litmos is a streamlined learning platform built for fast compliance training, while Ruangkerja is an Indonesian corporate learning platform. Three honest outcomes below, including the one where neither is right.

Go Litmos
Their own site states LXP: discovery, pathways, social learning; Reports on capability gained, not completions; Frontline and deskless, mobile first by design.
Compare with Disprz
Go Ruangkerja
If Ruangkerja's published material matches your brief more closely, take Ruangkerja.
Compare with Disprz
Go Disprz
You are measured on capability built rather than courses completed, your frontline teams keep stalling, and you need to be live inside one quarter.
Book a Disprz demo

FAQ

Litmos vs Ruangkerja, common questions

Is Litmos or Ruangkerja better?
Neither in general. Litmos for LXP: discovery, pathways, social learning, Reports on capability gained, not completions. Their published claims overlap closely, so decide on price and rollout.
Which has better reviews, Litmos or Ruangkerja?
No like-for-like rating comparison is possible. Ruangkerja: G2 (no profile on this site), Capterra (no profile on this site), Gartner Peer Insights (no profile on this site). Any score shown below stands on its own rather than as a comparison.
How much do Litmos and Ruangkerja cost?
Neither publishes list pricing. Both are quoted on headcount, modules and region, so ask each for a three-year total including content and services.
How long does implementation take with Litmos or Ruangkerja?
Litmos publishes no go-live figure. Ruangkerja publishes no go-live figure.
What does Ruangkerja do that Litmos does not?
On the capabilities compared, nothing that Ruangkerja publishes and Litmos does not.
Who publishes this Litmos vs Ruangkerja comparison?
This page is published by Disprz, which competes with both Litmos and Ruangkerja. Disprz is deliberately excluded from the capability table so it cannot tilt the comparison, and appears only where it is labelled. Ratings are read from each vendor's own profile and dated.

Transparency

How this comparison was built

A fixed method, applied identically to all 19 platforms in this set.

12 Capability claims per vendor Recorded only where the vendor states it on their own site. A blank means not verified, never assumed absent.
3 Independent review sites G2, Capterra and Gartner Peer Insights, each read on the vendor's own profile and screenshotted.
67 Screenshots held as evidence Every published rating traces to one of them. Each figure was read by a person on the vendor's own profile and captured on the date shown.
1 Named owner One person is accountable for every figure on this page, recorded against the vendor row.

A rating is printed only where a screenshot exists

Score, count, what the count measures, the profile name, the profile URL and the date read. Missing any of them and the figure stays off the page.

Unevidenced figures are suppressed, not estimated

Where a rating cannot be evidenced the cell reads "No verifiable count identified" rather than showing a number we cannot stand behind.

A wrong-product listing is discarded

Two listings in this set matched a different product entirely. Both were quarantined rather than published.

Capability rows record claims, not tests

Each row reflects what the vendor publishes about itself. It is not a verdict on how well the capability works.

Vendor figures are attributed to the vendor

Any performance number published by a vendor rather than independently verified is named as theirs in the text.

Facts live on the vendor, not the page

One correction to a vendor row fixes every page that references it, so the set cannot drift apart.

Every source used on this page

PlatformSourceUsed for Exact page readRead on
Litmos G2 Rating and review count Litmos 15 Sep 2026
Litmos Capterra Rating and review count Litmos 15 Sep 2026
Litmos Gartner Peer Insights Rating and review count Litmos 15 Sep 2026
Disprz G2 Rating and review count Disprz 15 Sep 2026
Disprz Capterra Rating and review count Disprz 15 Sep 2026
Disprz Gartner Peer Insights Rating and review count Disprz 15 Sep 2026

Why Disprz cannot tip this page

Disprz publishes this page and does not get a vote in what it says about Litmos or Ruangkerja. A rating is copied from that vendor's own profile and stored with the URL and the date, so any reader can open it and check.
  • The method was fixed before any vendor was read, so no row was chosen after seeing who it favoured.
  • Every third-party figure carries a screenshot, a profile URL and a read date.
  • Where a figure could not be evidenced it is suppressed, including for Disprz itself.
  • Disprz is not one of the two platforms compared here and is excluded from the capability table, though its own verified ratings are shown alongside for reference.
Spotted something wrong? It is fixed at source on the vendor record, which republishes every page that used the figure. Tell us what to correct.

Still deciding?

Tell us your headcount, your industry and the systems you already run, and we will map this comparison to your shortlist.

Book a Disprz demo