Ervy vs Litmos: Which training tool fits your team?
Ervy Team
6 min read
Litmos shows up on every "best LMS" list, so it is usually one of the first names on an L&D manager’s shortlist. The demo backs up the reputation – a vast catalogue and reporting deep enough to run serious training at scale. Getting started is a serious commitment – the quote takes weeks, the contract runs for years, and the entry point sits around 150 learners. At some point you find yourself asking whether you are buying an entire training operation when what you actually needed was training your team would finish.
That question – how many capabilities do you really need – is the one this comparison is built to answer. Both Ervy and Litmos live in the Microsoft Teams world, and both use AI to build courses and track completion. Yet, they are built for different jobs, and the right choice depends on which job is yours.
The short version
Litmos is a full extended-enterprise LMS for organisations that train employees, customers, and partners across one platform. Ervy is Microsoft Teams-native microlearning for getting internal training created and completed quickly.
Choose Litmos if you need to train audiences beyond your own staff, want a large off-the-shelf course catalogue, or run heavy multi-jurisdiction compliance programmes. Choose Ervy if your priority is internal training such as onboarding and policies, built fast from material you already have and completed inside Teams without standing up a full LMS.
What Litmos is built for
Litmos is a mature, established LMS whose real strength is breadth.
Its defining capability is extended enterprise: one platform can train your employees, your channel partners, and your customers, each with their own branding and content. Few tools do this as thoroughly. On top of that sits a large content library – Litmos markets more than 95,000 curated courses from third-party providers, plus a few thousand of its own – covering everything from compliance to leadership. Add SCORM support, certification tracking, and integration with major HR systems, and you have a platform built to run a whole training function at scale.
For organisations that need all of that, Litmos earns its reputation. The caveat is that the content library is a separate purchase on top of the platform licence, and the courses in it are generic by design – built for any company, not yours.
What Ervy is built for
Ervy delivers AI-built microlearning natively inside Microsoft Teams, turning material you already have into short lessons that fit into the working day instead of interrupting it.
There is no separate platform to log into. Lessons arrive in Teams, where people already spend their day, and they are short by design – around two minutes each, across four formats: theory, scenario, quiz, and podcast. Course creation runs with AI: you give it a document, a URL, a prompt, or any combination of the three, and it drafts a course you can adjust and publish. The focus is narrow on purpose. Ervy is built for internal employee training and for the metric most training tools struggle with – completion.
Where the learning actually lives
Litmos integrates with Microsoft Teams; Ervy runs inside it.
This distinction is easy to skim past, and it matters more than it looks. For Litmos, Teams is one integration among many – it sits alongside Zoom and Salesforce – and learners still log into Litmos to do the training. For Ervy, Teams is the product. Lessons are delivered, taken, and completed without anyone leaving the app they already have open.
This shows up in completion rates. Every extra login, every "go to the other platform" step, is a place where training gets postponed and then forgotten. Meeting people where they already work removes that gap.
How a course gets made
Both tools use AI to build courses, but they start from different places and end in different formats.
Litmos AI takes a topic or learning objective as its prompt and generates a structured, multi-module course with assessments, ready to edit on the platform. It is a time-saver when you are building traditional courses from scratch.
Ervy starts from what you already have. You can feed it a document, a URL, a prompt, or a mix – you need at least one input, but you are not limited to one – and it produces microlearning in Ervy’s own format: short microlearning lessons. What separates the two is the input and the output. Litmos authors a course from an idea; Ervy converts knowledge you already hold – your SOPs, your policy PDF – into lessons sized to be finished.
Content library versus your content
For generic topics, Litmos's library is hard to beat. For the training specific to your company, Ervy is the tool – that training doesn't exist off the shelf.
If your training need is broad and generic – general compliance and common soft skills – Litmos’s catalogue is hard to beat on size, and buying ready-made content can save real production time. That is an advantage worth paying for when it matches your need.
Most of the training that only your company can deliver, though, is not in any catalogue. Your product specifics, your internal processes – that knowledge lives in your documents, and it is exactly what Ervy is designed to turn into lessons. The two models suit different problems: a library fills gaps in general knowledge, while document-to-lesson conversion captures the knowledge specific to you.
Engagement and completion
Both tools include gamification; they differ in what actually drives people to finish.
On the fundamentals, the two are close. Litmos offers badges, leaderboards, points, and certificates. Ervy has points, leaderboards, and badges as well. Where Ervy goes somewhere Litmos does not is format: a two-minute lesson gets finished far more reliably than a long module, and that is engagement built into the design rather than bolted on as a reward.
Pricing and time to start
Litmos is quote-based; Ervy is straight-forward and built to start fast.
Litmos does not publish prices. Third-party benchmarks put it in the region of $4 to $15 per learner per month depending on volume and whether content is bundled, with annual or multi-year contracts and a practical starting point around 150 learners. Buyers commonly report a four-to-eight-week negotiation before anything goes live. Litmos’s pricing and contract structure are built for mid-market and up, which can leave the smallest teams priced out.
Ervy’s pricing is available on the web, and starts at $4 per user per month under 300 users and falls as you grow – $2.70 over 1,000 users, and lower again at larger volumes and on annual billing. There are no setup fees, a 30-day free trial with no credit card available, and deployment takes less than an hour.
So which should you choose?
Match the tool to the job: choose Litmos if you train customers or partners alongside employees, need a large ready-made course catalogue, or run compliance across many jurisdictions. It is a capable platform doing a big job, and for that job it is a sound choice.
Choose Ervy if your priority is internal training – onboarding, compliance – that you want built quickly from your own material and completed inside Teams, without the cost and setup of a full LMS. The two share the Microsoft ecosystem but do different jobs.
See it on your own content
The fastest way to tell which side of that split you are on is to try it with something real. Take one document you would actually train your team on – an onboarding guide or a policy – and see what Ervy turns it into.




