Home / Content hub

Benchmark & case study

Here we benchmark WorkshopBuddy against another popular tool and run through a real-world case study.

CutListOptimizer.com vs WorkshopBuddy

Feature comparison

Feature CLO WB
Lock part orientation
Import from spreadsheet
Edge banding
Save projects
Auto add stock
Sheet materials
Linear material settings
Share project via link
Trim parts & stock
Blade width per stock
Export to DXF, SVG & PTX
Settings for CNC, table and beam saws
Ability to move parts
Visualise all offcuts

Benchmarking method

All tests were performed with a paid subscription to CutListOptimizer.com and WorkshopBuddy using the appropriate settings.

Benchmark 1

Mix of large, medium & small parts


⬆ CutListOptimizer.com produces the pattern above using the Least wasted area settings, note the uneven clustering of green parts in the bottom right.


⬆ Using the Maximum efficiency setting, WorkshopBuddy produces a pattern with similar parts oriented & clustered together meaning fewer fence changes and more accurate cuts.

Benchmark 2

A real-world project

For this benchmark, we're using a project supplied by a user - a bookcase, a cabinet and some shelves. Three different plywood types are used - parts are allocated to each depending on the materials needed. The identical parts list was imported into both tools, which were both set to the appropriate length cut settings. There are a total of 91 parts in the project.

CLO WB Winner
Calculation time 7.42 seconds 0.17 seconds WB - 7.25 seconds quicker
Number of offcuts 71 55 WB - 16 fewer offcuts
Total cut length 5,994.5 5,634.5 WB - 360 inches less cutting
Total stock required 18 16 WB - 2 stock saved

Overall winner - WorkshopBuddy


For this real example, a WorkshopBuddy user was able to order two fewer sheets of plywood in a single project, saving well over $100. There was significantly less cutting to do and larger, more useful offcuts for future usage. The patterns are shown below for reference.