You may have chosen REDCap because your institution trusts it, and chosen a hosted version because nobody wants to run servers. If the study now needs Part 11 controls, a sponsor-ready validation story or a faster build, here is how to compare the options.
Free sandbox · No credit card · 21 CFR Part 11 aligned
| Question | Self-hosted REDCap | Hosted REDCap | Hosted EDC platform | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who runs the servers? | Your institution | Ask the host | Ask the vendor | |
| Who validates it? | You | Ask what is provided | Ask what is provided | |
| Field-level audit trail with reasons | Ask | Ask | Ask | |
| Who edits a form mid-study? | Study team | Study team | Ask | |
| Setup fee and contract term | Ask | Ask | Ask |
What to know first
Why people search
REDCap spread through academic medicine because it is capable, widely taught and, for institutional members, inexpensive. Many teams meet its limits not in the software but in the surrounding arrangement: a local instance run by an overstretched IT group, a version that lags, a queue for a form change, or a sponsor asking for validation documents the institution does not hold. Hosted options exist for exactly this gap, and people searching for a cloud version are usually asking: can someone else run it, and can it satisfy a regulator.
The honest answer depends on the arrangement. Hosting solves infrastructure; it does not by itself settle validation, change control, an audit trail with reasons for change, or electronic signatures. REDCap vs EDC for clinical trials walks through those differences, and REDCap for commercial industry trials covers what sponsors tend to ask. For a regulated study, the decision is less about where the servers are and more about who stands behind the validated state of the system.
Before comparing anything, write down the real requirement. Is it a hosted instance because your institution will not run one? A validation package for a sponsor audit? Part 11 signatures? A faster build? Each points to a different answer, and some of them are met without leaving REDCap at all.
The shortlist
Generic categories. Check each provider's own documents for specifics.
Keep your instance, add change control, documented validation and clear role separation. Often right for investigator-led, lower-risk research.
Read more Same softwareMove to another provider if the issue is service or upgrades. Compare what validation documentation is provided and who owns the audit trail.
Read more Purpose-builtCloud EDCs built for regulated studies. Compare build effort, amendment process, ePRO and consent included or add-on, and the contract structure.
Read more Large programmesSuites for global programmes with services teams. Compare lead time and the number of modules you need to buy separately.
Read more Where Capture fitsEDC, ePRO, eConsent, randomization and kit management in one system with one audit trail, built by your own team with AI drafting.
Read moreCriteria
| Criterion | What to ask every provider | Capture |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Where is data stored, and who operates it? | Hosted in the EU (Frankfurt) or the USA (N. Virginia); AES-256 at rest and TLS in transit |
| Audit trail | Field-level, with reasons, and can it be edited? | Field-level, append-only, hash-chained; user, time, old and new value and reason; exportable |
| Electronic signatures | Re-authentication and a meaning statement? | Password re-authentication and a legal meaning statement; eConsent with email one-time code |
| Form control | Can a live form change unnoticed? | Draft and approved states; approved forms locked for live use; changes recorded |
| Validation support | What documentation helps your own validation? | Documentation for sponsor validation and UAT is available to enterprise customers; validated use remains a shared responsibility |
| Roles and identity | Who sees participant names? | Site coordinators see names; researchers see coded IDs; row-level security at the database layer |
| Participant modules | ePRO, consent and randomization in the same study? | Included in the same platform with one audit trail |
| Cost | Setup fee, term and what changes the price? | Free sandbox; no setup fee; pay only once you go live |
The questions apply to every provider, including Capture. Capture does not currently offer offline entry; plan connectivity or a documented fallback.
The free sandbox includes every feature. Rebuild one REDCap form and review the audit trail yourself.
Build effort
A REDCap project exports its data dictionary as a spreadsheet. Upload that file, or any CSV, XLSX, PDF or DOCX of your instruments, to a draft form in Capture and the AI proposes the questions, choices and units for your review. You then add edit checks, a visit schedule and the roles each site needs. Nothing is saved until a person approves it, and approved forms lock for live use.
Drafted from an uploaded data dictionary
Systolic blood pressure
VSORRESAI proposed range 70 to 220 · review
Diastolic blood pressure
Mean arterial pressure
Position
Fit
Switching has a cost even when the destination is better. For investigator-initiated research that is low risk, runs inside one institution and will never meet a regulator, REDCap with sound local procedures can be the simplest, cheapest answer, and a hosted version removes the infrastructure burden. Do not move because a comparison page told you to.
A change is more likely to pay off when a sponsor, a regulator or a multi-site structure enters the picture: you need Part 11 controls, a validated vendor you can point to, consent and questionnaires in the same system, or a build that does not queue behind IT. Capture is suitable for Phase 1, 2 and 3 and is used by academic teams as well as biotechs; see EDC for investigator-initiated trials and the full Capture vs REDCap comparison.
Whichever route you take, plan the exit from the old system as carefully as the entry to the new one. How to migrate from REDCap sets out the steps: export the data and dictionary, rebuild with AI drafting, test in a sandbox and merge history at analysis.
Met by current setup
3 of 6
Sponsor audit
In 10 weeks
Evaluation checklist
Hosting, validation, signatures, build speed or cost: name the one that is driving the search.
Hosting location, audit trail detail, validation documents and contract term, in writing.
Rebuild the same form in each option and time the build and the first amendment.
Change a value with a reason and check what the trail records. See audit trail software.
Who writes and holds the validation evidence. See computer system validation.
Export the data dictionary and data; archive them with study documents.
Another hosted REDCap, other hosted EDC platforms, enterprise EDC and all-in-one self-serve platforms. Choose by writing down your real requirement and putting the same questions on hosting, audit trail, validation and cost to each provider.
The REDCap alternatives page covers the broader question of leaving REDCap. This page is for teams on hosted or regulated REDCap who want to know whether a purpose-built platform meets their requirements better.
Hosting alone does not. Part 11 compliance is a shared responsibility between the software and the sponsor's validated use of it, and depends on audit trail, signatures, access control and validation evidence. Ask each provider for specifics.
There is no direct import. Export your data dictionary and data, upload the dictionary for AI drafting, rebuild checks and the schedule, test in the free sandbox, and merge historical data at analysis. See how to migrate from REDCap.
In the EU (Frankfurt) or the USA (N. Virginia), with AES-256 encryption at rest and TLS in transit.
No. Academic teams, biotechs and field researchers use it. It is suitable for Phase 1, 2 and 3, and the sandbox is free until you go live.
No. Offline entry is not available today, so sites need a connection or a documented paper fallback.
Keep exploring
Upload your data dictionary, review the draft and check the audit trail yourself. No credit card, no sales call. Start building your study free.