Attio vs Close
 Attio |  Close | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 45/100 | 63/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 | #1 |
| Rated comments | 21 | 25 |
| Best for | Small startups setting up a first CRM; Teams that need custom objects such as partners or investors; Teams that work with their CRM through Claude or the API | Small sales teams and solo sellers doing high-volume cold calling; Teams that want calling, email, SMS and workflows inside the CRM; Founders who want a CRM they can pick up without a consultant |
| Skip it if | Sales teams wanting a polished, ready-made daily workflow; Teams needing deep automation without add-on apps | Teams that need marketing automation in the same tool; Teams that need flexible automation or deep lead-level reporting; Sellers who rely on three-way or conference calling |
| Starting price | £27/user/mo | $9/user/mo |
| Pricing (vendor-stated) | Shown in GBP for a UK visitor: Free plan for up to 3 seats (3 objects, 50,000 records, 1 synced mailbox per user); Plus £27/user/mo billed annually (£34 monthly, up to 10 seats); Pro £59/user/mo billed annually (£74 monthly); Enterprise is custom and annual only. 14-day Pro trial with no card required; startup discounts of up to 80%. | Per user per month: Solo $9 annual / $19 monthly (1 user, 10k leads, no workflows), Essentials $35 / $49, Growth $99 / $109, Scale $139 / $149; custom plans via sales. Calling and SMS billed at cost. 14-day free trial with no credit card; no free plan; 30-day money-back guarantee. |
Independent users mostly like Attio as a clean, flexible first CRM for small teams, and several single out its Claude/MCP and API access and its automatic email and calendar logging. The detractors are specific: it lacks the day-to-day polish sales teams expect, and some found it limited beyond light use and left within months. Roughly 30 of 72 comments were promotional (rival CRMs and services pitching in the same threads, plus a few generic Attio endorsements), and another 20 repeat-promoter comments were removed before review, so only about 20 comments carry an independent opinion.
Users like
- Flexible data model: users build custom objects, relationships, fields and views around their own process[1][2][3]
- Works well when driven through Claude via MCP or the API, to the point some users rarely open the interface[1][2][3][4][5]
- Email and calendar sync logs activity automatically, and one user notes a built-in call recorder[1][2][3]
- Quick to set up with a clean interface; small teams describe it as easy to onboard[1][2][3]
Users complain about
- Missing small polish that matters for daily sales work; some teams went back to HubSpot or ripped it out after two months[1][2][3][4]
- Feels limited once needs go past light use; users say it hits limits when scaling or takes a dedicated admin to run well[1][2][3]
- One user finds many features unnecessary and the AI integrations not yet useful[1]
Independent users mostly rate Close as a simple, fast, sales-first CRM that suits small outbound teams and solo sellers who live on the phone, with calling, email, SMS and workflows in one place. The trade-off is depth outside the calling workflow: users call it rigid, report automation flaws and missing calling features such as three-way calls, and say it is weak for marketing and lead-level reporting. About a third of the comments mentioning it were promotional, including roughly ten near-identical comments that name-drop Close while plugging a Reddit-monitoring tool, referral links, and agency or rival-CRM pitches, so those were set aside.
Users like
- Easy to pick up: users describe it as light, simple and fast, easier to onboard than HubSpot, with decent automation that does not overwhelm[1][2][3][4][5]
- Built for phone-heavy outbound: users cite the power dialer and smart views, cold callers hitting 250 to 350 dials a day, and running a BDR team's outbound from inside it[1][2][3][4]
- Calling, email, SMS and workflows sit in one place, which users say keeps reps productive and organized[1][2]
- Users call it good value for small teams and solo operators, saying a low-tier plan covers most of what they need[1][2][3]
Users complain about
- Rigid, with automation flaws: one team of about ten calls it very rigid but good enough, and a solo user flags its automation weaknesses[1][2][3]
- Calling has gaps: one user found no three-way calling, another hit quirks with calling and stayed on Apollo[1][2]
- Reporting centres on caller activity and revenue rather than deeper lead analysis[1]
- Not strong on the marketing side, according to a user who otherwise rates it highly[1]