Peer-review software built for academic conferences

You can add any required questions and specify exactly what reviewers should consider for each one.

You can include scoring questions (out of 5, 10, or any scale you prefer) to establish a grade, file uploads (e.g., a Word document annotated by the reviewer), free-text comments for the program chair, multiple-choice options, and much more.

You can hide submitters’ and authors’ identifying details from reviewers, and also hide reviewers’ names from authors if you choose to share the results with them.

Our intelligent algorithm assigns reviewers based on the target number of reviews and the topics covered, while preventing conflicts of interest to ensure a balanced process.

You can manually adjust assignments when needed.

Fourwaves communicates decisions to authors from the platform: submissions are grouped by the committee’s decision (accepted, rejected, revision requested), and you email each group from the platform with the decision, the presentation format, and next steps such as registration or poster upload. Personalized fields fill in each author’s details automatically.

Only if you choose to share them. In Fourwaves you pick which parts of the review form authors can see (for example the written feedback but not the numeric scores) and when they become visible. Authors then read the feedback from their own dashboard; reviewer names stay hidden under blind review settings.

Fourwaves exports your data for the conference or for publication: you can export all files into clearly labeled folders and generate a uniform Word document containing all information from accepted submissions, allowing you to create a structured abstract booklet by session, presentation type, or other criteria, for the conference or for publication purposes.

You can, but it’s typically a “DIY” workflow: collect submissions in a form, export to a spreadsheet, assign reviewers manually (or automatically), and track scores/comments in shared documents.

This can work for small events, but it gets messy fast when you have multiple tracks, conflicts of interest, or larger program committees.

Fourwaves can help you run the call for abstracts and peer review only. Organizers publish a submission form, assign reviewers, record decisions, notify authors and export the book of abstracts without using other modules like event registration or the event website. The free plan covers 25 submissions per event and paid plans have a flat annual fee. Registration, payments, the program, the mobile app and the event website are on the same event whenever they are needed, this year or at the next edition, with no migration and no second vendor. Oxford Abstracts and EasyChair also handle abstracts alone, but adding registration, payments, a mobile app or an event website means a second tool.

Fourwaves, EasyChair, Ex Ordo and Oxford Abstracts all run abstract submission and peer review for academic conferences; the differences are what happens after acceptance and how you buy. Fourwaves adds registration and payments, an event mobile app, the event website and the program on the same event, publishes flat annual prices, includes a free plan with 25 submissions per event, and keeps past events online indefinitely, so a committee can start with abstracts alone and add the rest at the next edition. Oxford Abstracts offers a paid symposium add-on for collecting symposia with their own sub-abstracts, prices per event, and guarantees event data access for one year (its pricing page, checked September 2026). Ex Ordo prices by quote after sales demos, collects panel and symposium submissions natively since January 2025, and syncs member status from Naylor Novi AMS, an association management system, on request, which suits associations that need that specific integration. EasyChair handles no payments and no event website. Detailed comparisons written by Fourwaves: Fourwaves vs EasyChair, Fourwaves vs Ex Ordo and the best Oxford Abstracts alternative.