Skip to main content

Sware Res_Q validates your systems. Seal runs the process, and tests changes to it.

Seal, the GxP execution system, is your eBR, your QMS and more. Neil, your AI agent, does the paperwork across your systems. You sign. Bioventix cut document admin time by 80%. Start with one process beside Sware Res_Q.

Book a demo

Where Sware Res_Q falls short.

From Sware’s own pages and announcements.

  • Res_Q
    “expert-assured”
    A customer
    “final validation deliverables, which they provided”
    Seal
    Neil, then your approval

    Sware’s people come with it.

    Sware calls Res_Q “expert-assured”, and a customer on its home page says Sware provided the final validation deliverables. In Seal, Neil configures the first process from your procedure, and your team approves it.

    Sware, home page
  • Software
    Validated in Res_Q
    Plant and equipment
    Validated in Res_Q
    The work itself
    In the systems it validates
    Seal
    Lab, manufacturing, quality

    Validation, apart from the work.

    Every Sware use case is validation: of software, AI, plant and equipment, or medical devices. Seal is where lab, manufacturing and quality workflows run, on one validated platform, so there are fewer systems to validate.

    Sware, home page
  • Sware’s chief executive
    “moving data by hand”
    Res_Q Connect
    Full production through Q4 2026
    Seal
    One set of records

    Moved between systems by hand.

    Sware’s chief executive says regulated teams move data between systems by hand. Its answer, Res_Q Connect, is rolling out full production capabilities through Q4 2026. In Seal, the lab, the batch and quality are one set of records.

    Sware, September 2026
  • Res_Q AI
    Monitors, flags milestones
    Also
    Writes validation scripts
    Neil
    Drafts the change

    Its AI writes the scripts. Neil drafts the change.

    Res_Q’s AI handles routine monitoring, flags milestones and turns on-screen processes into validation scripts. Neil prepares the change itself and the paperwork around it, for your team to approve.

    Sware, Res_Q

See it in Seal.

Real Seal screens with fictional test data: validating a LIMS update, from its requirements to a failed test and what is still missing.

  1. 1

    Requirements, by risk.

    Each requirement for a LIMS update carries its risk and the tests that cover it on the version under test.

    Requirements in Seal: six requirements for a LIMS, from a complete audit trail to backup and restore, each with its risk and the tests that pass on version 4.3.0.
    1. Requirements as recordsEach one published, with its own version.
    2. Risk on every requirementHigh, medium or low.
    3. Coverage, by versionWhich tests pass on 4.3.0.
  2. 2

    A failed step, with its evidence.

    The user acceptance run records what should happen, what did, and the screenshot that shows it.

    Step 3 of user acceptance run UAT-01 on version 4.3.0 in Seal: the expected out-of-specification banner, the actual result accepted without a flag, the step marked Fail, and the screenshot of the LIMS result entry attached as evidence.
    1. What should happenAn out-of-specification banner, and the result flagged.
    2. What did7.46 shown as 7.5 and accepted, with no flag.
    3. The evidence, attachedThe screenshot from the run, kept with the step.
  3. 3

    What is still missing, in one place.

    The change to the LIMS shows the required check that failed and the sign-offs still to come.

    Completion checks in Seal for change CC-003 to SampleTrack LIMS 4.3.1: two sign-offs remaining on the change and two on run UAT-01, and the required check that approved test cases pass marked Failed because the run on 4.3.1 is not finished.
    1. Sign-offs, countedTwo remaining on the change and two on the test run.
    2. A required check, failedApproved test cases must pass; the run on 4.3.1 isn’t finished.

What Seal’s customers measured.

Each figure links to the customer’s story.

QualityAcclinate and Skye Biologics

−50%
quality cycle times at Acclinate, from a procedure change to everyone trained.Acclinate
−40%
non-conformances at Skye Biologics, with training checked before execution.Skye Biologics

RecordsMiAlgae and Bioventix

−75%
documentation time at MiAlgae, from the lab to commercial production.MiAlgae
−80%
document admin time at Bioventix, after two decades on paper.Bioventix

Sware Res_Q and Seal, side by side.

Every source is listed under References.

Sware Res_QSeal
What it isGxP validation platform¹The GxP execution system: your eBR, your QMS and more
Data modelThe system under validation, its risk score and templates¹Primitives your team composes: record types, their relationships, steps and checks
AISummarises release notes, drafts scripts, monitors, configures transfers²³⁴¹Neil, Seal’s AI agent, prepares changes to the process; your team approves them
Runs the workValidates the systems and equipment that run it⁵⁶Lab, manufacturing and quality
ValidatesThe systems you runIts workflows, and other systems
A supplier releaseRelease documents uploaded for impact assessment, as with ZenQMS⁷Your tests run before Quality signs
EvidenceScripts, risk records, approvals¹Test results tied to the version in use
Getting startedSaaS, with Sware’s GxP experts¹A 48-hour evaluation of one process, once the scope is agreed and the inputs received

Summary

The story
Sware Res_Q is good for GxP validation. Validation practitioners founded the company as Boston Technology Research (BTR); in February 2022 it described Res_Q as a lifecycle in which every system that affects patients is tested when installed and every time it changes, and that October it renamed itself Sware.⁸⁹¹⁰ Its unit is still the system under validation, scored for risk by its criticality and documented from standardised templates.¹ Sware claims 80% faster validation and 60% lower lifetime CSV costs, yet calls the platform “expert-assured”, and a customer on its home page credits Sware with providing the final validation deliverables.¹¹ Its AI, added in 2024, summarises release notes, turns screen recordings into validation scripts and, since September 2026, configures automations between Res_Q and other systems for people to approve.²³⁴ If you run many separate systems and need each one validated, it can work well. Better still is fewer systems: one platform where the process, the equipment and the evidence that they are fit for use live together.

1What Sware Res_Q offers.

Sware, Inc. is based in Boston, Massachusetts, and was called BTR, for Boston Technology Research, until it renamed itself in October 2022.¹²¹⁰ It sells three products: Res_Q, its validation platform; Res_Q Connect, an integration layer launched in September 2026; and GxPNext, validation built into the development of life sciences software.¹¹⁴¹³

Res_Q scores each system’s risk from its criticality, turns on-screen processes into validation scripts, makes uploaded documents searchable and connects Jira, ServiceNow and automated testing.¹ For plant and equipment, Sware says it unifies equipment qualification, calibration and change management in one system of record;⁶ for medical devices, Sware’s suite adds process validation and design history files.¹⁴ Sware says customers grow it by working from the same standardised templates and workflows,¹ and when it renamed itself it described a marketplace of pre-built compliance modules and ready-to-use templates, SOPs, test scripts and workflows.¹⁰

2Running Seal alongside Sware Res_Q.

You can start without replacing Res_Q: it keeps validating the systems you still run while the first process moves to Seal. Seal has no dedicated Res_Q connector. Where a system is not on Seal’s integrations list, Seal’s REST API and Scripts can connect it. On Sware’s side, Res_Q Connect links Res_Q to QMS and ERP platforms, to browser-based systems through Playwright and to file transfer through SFTP.¹⁵

Agree the records, the direction of transfer, the credentials and the failure handling before implementation. Start with read access, and treat any write in either direction as a separate decision with defined actions, review gates and audit evidence. Qualify the connection by defining identifiers and field mappings, testing missing, delayed and duplicate records, and reconciling transferred records against the source, as the regulatory guide describes. Where code changes reach production, Seal’s GitHub app creates a Seal change record from a configured template when a matching pull request opens.

3Moving from Sware Res_Q to Seal.

Move the work first, and the validation of that work comes with it.

  1. Choose one process that runs today in a system Res_Q validates, where each change means another validation cycle, such as a release test or an equipment logbook.
  2. Bring the procedure, its requirements and current test evidence. Start with sample records, or arrange an NDA before sharing confidential ones.
  3. Neil proposes the workflow from the procedure, with its verification cases, and your team checks it against how the work runs. In the 48-hour evaluation, Seal turns one process into a working workflow with a validation pack to inspect, once the scope is agreed and the inputs received. Production timing then depends on scope, interfaces, migration and your release requirements.
  4. Exercise a change before relying on it: a revised limit, a failed check and its retest, and the release decision that follows.
  5. Keep earlier validation packages retrievable in Res_Q for their retention period. Imported evidence keeps its original version and context, and importing it does not establish that it covers the current use.

The validation blueprint and the regulatory guide set out where Seal’s responsibilities end and your team’s begin.

References

  1. 1Res_Q: The Intelligent Electronic Validation Software, Sware. https://www.sware.com/products/res_q (read 5 November 2026)
  2. 2Sware Adds AI Assistance to Res_Q Platform, Receives SOC 2 Type II Certification, Sware, 3 September 2024. https://www.sware.com/press-release/sware-adds-ai-assistance-and-receives-soc-2-type-ii-certification (read 5 November 2026)
  3. 3Sware Launches Enhanced, AI-Powered Res_Q Platform to Advance GxP Validation in Life Sciences, Sware, 21 October 2025. https://www.sware.com/press-release/sware-launches-enhanced-ai-powered-res_q-platform (read 5 November 2026)
  4. 4Sware Launches Res_Q Connect, Ending the Manual Work of Moving Data Between Regulated Systems, Sware, 15 September 2026. https://www.sware.com/press-release/sware-launches-res_q-connect (read 5 November 2026)
  5. 5Life Sciences Validation Software, Sware. https://www.sware.com/use-cases/software-validation (read 5 November 2026)
  6. 6Pharmaceutical Equipment Validation Software, Sware. https://www.sware.com/use-cases/plant-equipment-validation (read 5 November 2026)
  7. 7Sware Partners with ZenQMS to Simplify GxP Validation Across the Software Lifecycle, Sware, 22 July 2026. https://www.sware.com/announcement-sware-partners-with-zenqms (read 5 November 2026)
  8. 8About, Sware. https://www.sware.com/about (read 5 November 2026)
  9. 9BTR Raises $15M in Series A Funding, FinSMEs, 10 February 2022. https://www.finsmes.com/2022/02/btr-raises-15m-in-series-a-funding.html (read 5 November 2026)
  10. 10BTR Rebrands as Company That Life Sciences and Healthcare Innovators Can Sware By, Business Wire, 11 October 2022, as archived on 12 April 2026. https://web.archive.org/web/20260412174009/https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20221011005532/en/BTR-Rebrands-as-Company-That-Life-Sciences-and-Healthcare-Innovators-Can-Sware-By (read 5 November 2026)
  11. 11GxP Validation Software: Data-Driven Solutions, Sware. https://www.sware.com/ (read 5 November 2026)
  12. 12Contact Sware, Sware. https://www.sware.com/about/contact-us (read 5 November 2026)
  13. 13GxPNext: Agentic GxP validation for software developers, Sware. https://www.sware.com/products/gxpnext (read 5 November 2026)
  14. 14Medical Device & SaMD Validation Software, Sware. https://www.sware.com/use-cases/medical-device-samd (read 5 November 2026)
  15. 15Res_Q Connect, Sware. https://www.sware.com/products/res_q-connect (read 5 November 2026)

AQuestions and answers

Is Seal better than Sware Res_Q?

Yes. Sware Res_Q is good for GxP validation. Validation practitioners founded the company as Boston Technology Research (BTR); in February 2022 it described Res_Q as a lifecycle in which every system that affects patients is tested when installed and every time it changes, and that October it renamed itself Sware. Its unit is still the system under validation, scored for risk by its criticality and documented from standardised templates. Sware claims 80% faster validation and 60% lower lifetime CSV costs, yet calls the platform “expert-assured”, and a customer on its home page credits Sware with providing the final validation deliverables. Its AI, added in 2024, summarises release notes, turns screen recordings into validation scripts and, since September 2026, configures automations between Res_Q and other systems for people to approve. If you run many separate systems and need each one validated, it can work well. Better still is fewer systems: one platform where the process, the equipment and the evidence that they are fit for use live together. Seal has no fixed model of one kind of work. It is built from primitives: record types, the relationships between them, and the steps and checks that use them, which your own team composes into your process, with Neil able to prepare each change for approval. So one platform runs process development, the laboratory, manufacturing, batch release and the quality system, and each change becomes a new version, released once its selected tests pass, while earlier runs keep theirs. Moving from paper, Bioventix cut document admin time by 80%, and a customer audit commented positively on its electronic signatures and audit trails.

Who makes Res_Q?

Res_Q is made by Sware, Inc., a Boston-based company that was called BTR, for Boston Technology Research, until it renamed itself Sware in October 2022.

Is Seal an alternative to Sware Res_Q?

Yes. Res_Q is designed for GxP validation. Seal is where lab, manufacturing and quality workflows run, on one validated platform, so there are fewer systems to validate, and each change to those workflows carries its own checks to release. For the systems you keep, Seal holds their requirements and tests and runs them on each supplier release before Quality can sign.

Can Seal validate other software, not just itself?

Yes. A supplier system gets its intended use, requirements and test cases in Seal, and each release is a change control. Automated test cases call the system’s API from a Seal Script; manual test cases are run step by step with screenshots. The release cannot be signed until its tests pass. Each failed step raises a warning that must be answered, and failures are recorded as a deviation before Quality signs. Your team still owns the intended use and the release decision.

Does Res_Q run lab, manufacturing or quality work?

Sware describes Res_Q as a GxP validation platform. It validates software, equipment, AI systems and medical devices, and Sware says it works alongside the QMS and connects to the CMMS for calibration, so the lab, manufacturing and quality work stays in those systems, each with its own release cycle. In Seal, lab, manufacturing and quality workflows run on one validated platform, and each change to them carries its own checks to release.

How does Res_Q’s AI compare with Neil?

Sware added AI Assistance to Res_Q in September 2024 to summarise release notes and keep document sets consistent, added document processing and video-to-script conversion in October 2025, and launched Res_Q Connect in September 2026 to configure automations between Res_Q and other systems from a plain-language request, for review and approval. Sware now calls Res_Q agentic, saying AI handles routine monitoring and flags milestones; its AI works on validation documents, monitoring and the transfers between systems. Neil prepares changes to the process itself, its records, steps and checks, for your team to verify and release under change control. Neil is not used in GMP execution.

How long does it take to start with Seal?

In the 48-hour evaluation, Seal turns one process into a working workflow with a validation pack to inspect, configured from your own procedure, once the scope is agreed and the inputs received. Production timing then depends on scope, interfaces, migration and your release requirements.

Start beside Sware Res_Q.

Start with one process that a system Res_Q validates runs today. Seal’s REST API and Scripts read what it needs with read access, so nothing has to move on day one.

Book a demo