Qualified vs Grain
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Qualified and Grain.
🏆
Verdict: Grain wins
Grain scores 4.0/5, edging out Qualified at 3.9/5. Sales and customer-facing teams of roughly 5-50 seats that want meeting capture, CRM-ready notes, and call coaching at published per-seat prices.
Qualified AI pipeline generation for enterprise B2B | Grain AI meeting recording and insights for sales | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 3.9 (1 review) | 4.0 (1 review) |
| Pricing Model | paid | freemium |
| Starting Price | From $3500/mo | Free tier available |
| Best For | Salesforce-standardised B2B companies with meaningful website traffic that want an AI agent to qualify inbound visitors and book meetings without managing per-credit billing. | Sales and customer-facing teams of roughly 5-50 seats that want meeting capture, CRM-ready notes, and call coaching at published per-seat prices. |
| Free Tier | ||
| API Access | ||
| Team Features | ||
| Open Source | ||
| Tags | ssoteam features | free tierteam features |
| Visit Qualified → | Visit Grain → |
Qualified
Pros
- + The identification → conversation → meeting → Salesforce logging chain works end to end when CRM ownership data is clean
- + Capacity ceilings are explicit per tier (250K/2M/5M monthly web sessions), so buyers can match plan to traffic before negotiating
- + Agent Studio guardrails let teams set escalation and refusal rules instead of trusting default model behaviour
- + Flat packaging includes agent, platform, implementation and support — no credit metering to manage mid-quarter
Cons
- - No published pricing at any tier — every plan is 'Contact us', so you cannot evaluate cost without a sales cycle
- - Salesforce-first to the point of dependency: deep reporting, sandbox and logging assume Salesforce as the system of record
- - Meeting routing amplifies your CRM data quality — with stale ownership records in my test, meetings went to the wrong reps
- - Weak fit for low-traffic or early-stage sites where an AI SDR has little volume to convert
Grain
Pros
- + Bot-free desktop capture meant no notetaker robot to explain at the start of customer calls — the transcripts and AI notes held up in my checks
- + Transparent per-seat pricing from $15/mo (annual) with a usable free tier, against quote-only enterprise incumbents
- + Custom AI prompts let me steer summary shape to match our CRM hygiene process instead of accepting a generic template
- + MCP server on the platform (basic on Free, advanced on Business) let Claude query workspace meeting data directly
- + Trackers, deal boards, and AI coaching bring Gong-style call intelligence to a five-to-fifty-seat team at a fraction of the price
Cons
- - Recorder-seat rules on Free are contradictory in Grain's own docs (pricing page: unlimited notetaker seats; support article: one, plus a 20-bot-recording cap for personal emails)
- - Free tier walls are hard: 45-minute meetings, short history (30 days per the pricing page), and no uploads, CRM, or coaching
- - Starter caps uploads at 10/month and its 10-upload limit bites teams importing external recordings
- - All paid seats in a workspace must be on the same plan tier — no mixing Starter and Business to control costs
- - Thinner revenue intelligence than Gong-class tools: no predictive deal scoring or deep forecasting
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Qualified or Grain?▼
Grain scores higher at 4.0/5 vs 3.9/5 for Qualified, making it the better-rated option in our comparison.
What is the difference between Qualified and Grain?▼
Qualified: AI-powered pipeline generation platform that identifies and engages high-value website visitors in real-time using AI agents. Grain: Grain records, transcribes and summarises meetings, and clips the moments worth sharing into the CRM or a message.
Is Qualified or Grain more affordable?▼
Qualified starts at €3500/mo, Grain starts at €0/mo. Check the comparison table above for current pricing.
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.