RX25 registration is now OPEN for our biggest event yet – Sept. 23-25

2025 Rock Integrated Services Survey

With an ever growing list of companies offering services in the Rock RMS space, we asked the community to share their experience with vendors.

Rock Integrated Vendor

Differential / Apollos

6.0 5 Responses

AI Generated Summary

Feedback on Differential (Apollos) reveals a mix of strong appreciation for their innovative approach and partnership, alongside significant concerns about technical and data issues. Users value the team’s forward-thinking mindset, solid customer service, and the features offered by the platform. However, several respondents expressed dissatisfaction with high costs, limited customization, and problematic app behavior—including data integrity issues like duplicate records and incorrect birthdates. Some also noted a lack of seamless integration with Rock RMS and difficulty in resolving issues, which led at least one organization to transition to the Rock-native app. Overall, while Differential is seen as a capable and visionary partner, experiences with reliability and integration have been inconsistent.

Learn More About our Survey Methodology

All reviews in this survey were voluntarily submitted by members of the community, and Spark has refrained providing any ratings themselves. The overall ratings presented in this report represent an average of the community's individual ratings. The comments provided by participants have been consistently summarized using ChatGPT with the guiding prompt below.

Below are a series of comments from a survey we did on a Rock RMS integrated partner Differential / Apollos. Please summarize the comments in a way that is professional, concise, and accurate and in a single paragraph.

It's important to note that a very small subset of ratings was excluded from the analysis for the following reasons:

  1. Submissions that provided a rating score but accompanied it with comments indicating they had insufficient knowledge of the service.
  2. Ratings submitted by integrated partners who rated either themselves or their competitors were omitted from the analysis. These ratings were deemed potentially biased due to a perceived conflict of interest.