ShowMojo vs Rently 2026: Leasing Features and Costs

Choose the platform around your leasing bottleneck

Choose ShowMojo when your primary problem is coordinating inquiries, qualification, appointments, and leasing follow-up. Put Rently first on your shortlist when self-guided access, community navigation, or extending access technology into resident operations drives the purchase. Both cover touring and leasing automation; the useful distinction is which operating workflow you want to standardize.

Leasing automation is software that moves rental inquiries through qualification, scheduling, touring, and follow-up using rules your team configures.

TL;DR: ShowMojo is the more natural starting point for a leasing-process purchase; Rently is the more natural starting point for an access-and-touring purchase. These are buyer-fit judgments based on public documentation, not results from a hands-on product test. Hardware compatibility, integration scope, and the written quote can reverse either recommendation.

Ownership also deserves attention. ShowMojo belongs to PropertyTek, which is backed by Greater Sum Ventures; its parent announced its current leadership appointment on October 9, 2025, according to Greater Sum Ventures. The product remains marketed as ShowMojo, so the ownership change does not require you to shop for a renamed replacement.

Rently appears in M-One Capital's investment portfolio, where it is described as a recapitalization-and-growth investment, led by co-founder Merrick Lackner, and founded in 2011, according to M-One Capital. That establishes disclosed investment backing, not a complete ownership register. Neither ownership source establishes that these products have merged with each other.

Who this is for

This comparison is for a leasing manager selecting a residential touring system while keeping an existing property management system, CRM, or application process. It is especially useful when operations staff and leasing staff disagree about whether the biggest problem is missed appointments or unreliable property access.

Red flags: you need a replacement accounting system; you cannot authorize compatible access hardware; or your team has no owner for failed tours and integration exceptions. Resolve those disqualifiers before signing for either platform.

Key Takeaways

• Choose ShowMojo first when scheduling, prescreening, listing coordination, and leasing communications form the core buying requirement. Its live-answering tier merits consideration if inbound calls remain a staffing problem.

• Choose Rently first when the tour requires a coordinated physical access journey, particularly across community entrances, amenities, and units. Confirm the actual hardware and community package rather than assuming all access products are included.

• Compare equivalent billing bases. A managed unit, an on-market listing, and an annual listing credit describe different purchasing units; their headline prices cannot establish the cheaper total contract.

• Treat integration claims as a starting point. Request the actual objects, directions of synchronization, plan entitlements, and failure behavior for your existing systems.

• Preserve human ownership of access problems, disputed screening outcomes, and application decisions. Adding automation does not remove the need for an accountable leasing manager.

How we evaluated the leasing decision

We reviewed official product pages, public pricing, ownership disclosures, and documentation, then considered independent renter research and consumer reviews. The weights below are our editorial decision framework, not a survey or a vendor score. They prioritize a prospect's ability to reach a usable tour over the length of a feature list.

Apply the weights to your requirements after the vendors demonstrate them. A failed mandatory requirement should disqualify a product even if it performs well elsewhere. For example, incompatibility with a required entry system matters more than attractive reporting.

We have not assigned numerical vendor scores because public pages cannot establish how either product behaves in your account. Our recommendations distinguish documented product scope from purchasing analysis. Performance claims, customer stories, and prospective roadmap features do not substitute for an acceptance check against your properties.

Normalize the features before comparing promises

The matrix summarizes advertised scope and identifies the question that should govern acceptance. It does not imply that every feature belongs to every plan. The primary pricing evidence linked below establishes the relevant packaging; the vendor profiles explain where additional validation matters.

Do not read a capability in the opposing column as proof that the products are equivalent. Calendar routing is valuable when agents cover dispersed homes; a guided community route matters when prospects must navigate parking, controlled entrances, and amenities. Your property layout determines which capability deserves the most scrutiny.

Likewise, an integration logo does not establish a complete workflow. Listing import, prospect export, appointment synchronization, and application-status updates are separate capabilities. Ask vendors to show the relevant record changing in your destination system rather than stopping at a connector name.

Pricing and total cost: compare the same buying unit

Pricing checked October 10, 2026.

The table preserves the public page's billing language. ShowMojo displays listing charges and annual-plan starting rates per unit. Rently displays annual credit packages for single-family leasing and custom pricing for broader configurations. Confirm billing cadence and contract terms where the displayed price does not settle them.

A starting unit rate is not a complete portfolio quote. Confirm whether it applies to all managed units, how inventory changes affect billing, what minimums apply, and how the advertised annual-plan rate becomes the invoice. Do not convert ShowMojo's displayed unit rate into an annual total without written confirmation of its billing basis.

Rently's annual pool is a different budgeting mechanism. Forecast active listing-months across the leasing season, rather than treating annual credits as permanent doors. Confirm how unused credits, additional credits, and renewal work. A lower published credit price does not establish a lower contract cost if your required configuration is custom.

Hardware adds another purchasing layer. Include installation, replacement, connectivity, battery servicing, field visits, and any included or separate support. Obtain written compatibility confirmation before assuming your existing locks eliminate those costs. Compare equivalent access coverage, including entrances outside the rental unit.

Keep vacancy assumptions separate from vendor costs. Faster leasing may be valuable, but it remains a hypothesis until your own records show the change. Avoid financing a purchase with a vendor's marketing percentage. For general contract questions, the site's subscription-plan comparison offers another category's buying perspective; it is not leasing evidence.

ShowMojo profile: prioritize coordination and controlled data changes

Best fit: a residential leasing team that wants a consistent process from inquiry to appointment and follow-up. Consider the live-answering tier when the buying requirement includes human telephone coverage, and distinguish that service from software-based prospect engagement.

Limitations: a broad leasing feature list does not establish resident-access lifecycle coverage, complete CRM write access, or support for every application workflow. Confirm add-on entitlements and integration behavior. An operator primarily purchasing building-wide access infrastructure should require a separate access assessment before favoring ShowMojo.

Implementation: start with property identifiers, listing ownership, showing availability, and staff assignments. Then configure qualification questions, communications, and the access method. Decide which system owns each field before synchronizing it. Have a manager approve the prospect-facing settings and field mapping.

A concrete, illustrative rollout shows why import behavior matters. Suppose a leasing manager prepares 200 listing records for ShowMojo, whose documented import limit is 100 listings per request: 200 ÷ 100 = 2 sequential requests, using the documented mls_id field where appropriate for matching, according to ShowMojo. The portfolio count and request count are scenario inputs and arithmetic, not a customer result. The documentation also says updates replace existing listing information, so the manager should approve complete payloads, wait for each import to finish, and inspect returned errors before continuing.

That example makes completeness a practical disqualifier. If your export omits fields that the destination replaces, a technically accepted import can still create an operational problem. Validate listing descriptions, availability, media, and application routing in a controlled account before enabling recurring updates.

In a proposed US Tech Automations workflow, an approved listing export triggers validation against the portfolio's identifier map, followed by a review queue for missing or conflicting records. Only manager-approved records proceed through the account's supported import interface; the output is a reconciliation report showing accepted records and exceptions. Prerequisites include authorized export access, the required ShowMojo account permission, complete field mappings, and a maintained destination schema. This is a configurable design, not an existing deployment.

Choose ShowMojo when that leasing process matches your priorities and its account-specific integration passes acceptance. Reject it when a mandatory destination action, hardware combination, or support arrangement cannot be demonstrated or contracted.

Rently profile: inspect the whole route to the unit

Best fit: a team that treats property access as the central touring requirement, including scattered homes or communities where prospects must navigate a route. Its broader product scope also warrants consideration when resident access or smart-home operations belongs to the same purchasing project.

Rently describes lockbox and smart-lock access, identity verification, entry audit trails, and multifamily wayfinding on its touring page, according to Rently. These are vendor-described capabilities, not independent confirmation of installation compatibility or security effectiveness.

Limitations: do not assume the single-family package prices apply to a multifamily community. Do not purchase a roadmap feature as if it were an included operating capability. The pricing page labels voice AI and a website chatbot as coming soon; require written availability for your market and package.

Implementation: map the actual prospect route before selecting devices. Include parking instructions, community entry, amenity access, unit access, and the procedure for returning or securing keys. Assign responsibility for field maintenance and recovery when a prospect is already at the property.

The residential company's profile displays a TrustScore of 3.5/5 and Review sample: 134 reviews according to Trustpilot (2026). These are consumer-review signals, not a matched sample of leasing managers or a controlled comparison with ShowMojo. Use them to investigate renter access and support experience, not to calculate a vendor ranking.

Renter-facing failures deserve a separate acceptance exercise from administrative setup. Have someone unfamiliar with the property follow the approved route and contact the assigned support owner when instructed. Check what staff can see and do when identity verification fails or access does not work. Keep a staffed alternative for exceptions.

Choose Rently when the demonstrated tour route and contracted access package address your actual problem. Reject it when required hardware, community entry, or the human recovery process remains unresolved. A comprehensive brochure cannot compensate for an inaccessible entrance.

Make acceptance follow the renter's decision

Independent research helps choose the acceptance priorities, but it cannot establish which vendor performs better. The figures below concern recent renters and what they considered essential when deciding which home to rent. A private tour is not necessarily a self-guided tour.

Use that distinction to build an acceptance sequence. Begin with the prospect's listing, continue through qualification and scheduling, and finish with property access and the next leasing action. Include both the expected path and an intentionally interrupted path.

Your decision checklist should cover these points:

• Confirm that the listing and prospect instructions agree with approved property information.

• Change an appointment and inspect the calendar, prospect message, and staff record.

• Use the intended access route and demonstrate the fallback when entry fails.

• Interrupt a synchronization attempt and inspect the error, retry, and duplicate-prevention behavior.

• Transfer a prospect to a staff member and confirm ownership appears in the destination record.

• Export the resulting activity and demonstrate what would remain available after cancellation.

Record each result as demonstrated, failed, or unresolved. Unresolved requirements remain open purchasing questions. Ask the relevant staff member to explain recovery without relying on the person who configured the system.

The common mistake is ending acceptance at a scheduled appointment. A useful tour record should distinguish scheduling from completion and show the next owner. A prospect can schedule successfully yet fail to enter, abandon the route, or receive contradictory follow-up.

Own the handoffs between touring and your existing systems

Neither vendor should be expected to repair unclear ownership across your stack. Define the source of truth for listings, prospect identity, appointment status, and application progress. Also decide who can override a record and what evidence an override preserves.

A second proposed US Tech Automations workflow would start when an authorized tour export or supported event feed reports a completed or interrupted visit. It could match the prospect to the CRM, apply configured duplicate checks, and create an internal follow-up task or access-exception queue. The output would include the source record, processing status, and assigned staff owner. Prerequisites are access to the relevant feed or exports, CRM permissions, stable identifiers, and an agreed definition of each tour status. A leasing manager would review ambiguous matches and failed access before any downstream prospect communication.

Zapier, Make, n8n, or an in-house service can implement similar coordination. They can support run histories, retries, error branches, and audit evidence when configured. The buyer must still design and own observability, idempotency, escalation, access controls, and maintenance. Native connectors may be the economical choice when the handoff is straightforward and an internal owner can maintain it.

A proposed US Tech Automations design could configure an explicit exception queue, documented field ownership, replay rules, and human approval points around those handoffs. That difference depends on the agreed design and available interfaces; it is not evidence of superior reliability or a promise that every vendor action is available.

For related operational thinking, the campaign-underpacing alert recipe illustrates a different department's exception-management problem. The SaaS software comparison provides another buying context. Neither supplies evidence about leasing functionality.

Questions leasing managers should settle before signing

Is ShowMojo or Rently the better fit for scattered homes?

Either may fit scattered homes, depending on whether leasing coordination or property access is the dominant requirement.

Use representative properties to check agent travel, listing updates, device handling, and renter recovery. A dispersed portfolio does not remove the need to validate hardware and the exact integration.

Which platform is cheaper?

The published prices do not establish a universal cheaper option because the billing units and included scope differ.

Request equivalent quotes using the same portfolio, active-listing forecast, access equipment, communications, and support requirements. Include commitments and recurring device costs.

Can either platform replace our property management system?

Neither should be selected on the assumption that touring automation replaces your accounting and property management system.

Define the records each product owns. Demonstrate the supported handoffs to your existing application, leasing, and accounting processes before removing any current workflow.

Does self-guided touring remove the need for staff?

Self-guided touring changes staff responsibilities while retaining the need for exception handling and leasing decisions.

Assign an owner for verification problems, inaccessible properties, unclear instructions, and prospects who need assistance. Test that owner’s recovery procedure during acceptance.

Should we trust online ratings when choosing?

Online ratings are useful investigation prompts rather than sufficient evidence for a purchasing decision.

Confirm that a review page covers the residential product, inspect the review population, and distinguish renters' experiences from administrators' experiences. Similar names can lead to entirely unrelated software listings.

When NOT to use US Tech Automations?

Use your existing tools when native vendor features cover the workflow, a maintained no-code connection handles the handoff, or there is no authorized interface for the required action.

In those situations, another orchestration layer adds ownership and maintenance without solving a demonstrated gap. Stabilize the native process first and define the missing action before commissioning additional configuration.

Choose the workflow your team can recover

Favor ShowMojo for the leasing-coordination problem and Rently for the access-and-tour-route problem, then let mandatory requirements and equivalent written quotes decide. Keep unresolved integration, hardware, and support questions visible until someone demonstrates or contracts the answer.

If the remaining gap is a handoff between touring and your existing systems, see how US Tech Automations can configure that handoff. Any proposed configuration should start with authorized interfaces, explicit record ownership, and a named human reviewer for exceptions.