Avoma vs Otter.ai
 Avoma |  Otter.ai | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 51/100 | 42/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 | #5 |
| Rated comments | 9 | 27 |
| Best for | Small and mid-size sales teams that want Gong-style call recording at a lower price; Managers who score and review rep calls with scorecards; Reps who want call notes generated from their own templates | Individuals who want transcripts of their own meetings or in-person conversations recorded on a phone; Users who export transcripts into ChatGPT or other tools for their own summaries |
| Skip it if | Teams that need responsive vendor support | Organisations that need tight control over who is recorded and who receives meeting notes; Meetings with strong accents or more than one language; Users who need to pause recording mid-call |
| Starting price | $19/mo | $8.33/user/mo |
| Pricing (vendor-stated) | Per recording seat: Startup $19/mo billed annually ($29 monthly, up to 25 seats), Organization $29/mo annually ($39 monthly), Enterprise $39/mo billed annually only (10-seat minimum). Conversation Intelligence and Revenue Intelligence add-ons are $29/seat/mo each annually; viewers are free. 14-day free trial of the Organization plan, no credit card. | Free Basic plan (300 transcription minutes per user per month, 30 minutes per conversation). Pro is $8.33/user/mo billed annually or $16.99 monthly; Business is $19.99/user/mo billed annually or $30 monthly; Enterprise is sales-led. No free trial mentioned. |
Independent discussion is thin: about nine non-promotional comments carry a real opinion, mostly short notes from sales and RevOps users. Those users treat Avoma as a cheaper Gong or Chorus substitute that covers the basics well: recordings, searchable transcripts, template-based notes and call scorecards. The main complaints are the overall product and support quality, voiced by one team that still keeps it for transcription and scoring, and a preference for Granola among another team. Seven of 23 comments were promotional, mostly plugs for other notetakers, Reddit-monitoring tools or Avoma itself with a feature list and link.
Users like
- Users pick it as a cheaper alternative to Gong and Chorus that still covers the basics; one rep who has used all three calls it their go-to low-cost option[1][2][3][4]
- Recordings, searchable transcripts and actionable summaries are rated well; one RevOps user calls it the best meeting transcription tool they have used[1][2][3][4]
- Call scorecards help managers check that reps follow the playbook, and one team says the scoring is accurate[1][2]
- Notes can be generated from your own templates, which one sales user prefers over Gemini's built-in Google Meet notes[1]
Independent opinion is split: of 27 non-promotional opinions, 15 are favourable, from individuals who say it saves note-taking time, records in-person conversations from a phone, and transcribes accurately once speakers are tagged. The criticism centres on how it behaves in other people's meetings: users and admins describe it auto-joining calendars, emailing invitees, being hard to remove and confusing permissions, and one cites a class action over recording without consent; others report weaker summaries, trouble with accents and mixed languages, and a price rise that cut transcription hours. About a sixth of the comments were promotional, including repeated tool-stack lists and three plugs for an unrelated "Vibe Otter" website builder, and are discounted here.
Users like
- Takes over note-taking so users can stay in the conversation; several call it a game changer or big time saver[1][2][3][4][5]
- Records in-person or from a phone without inviting a bot into the meeting[1][2][3]
- Transcripts are searchable or easy to export: users ask what a client said about a topic, or paste transcripts into ChatGPT for summaries[1][2][3]
- Accurate transcription once trained: long-time users praise accuracy after tagging speakers, building a dictionary or correcting words, which it then applies elsewhere[1][2][3][4]
Users complain about
- Intrusive defaults: it can auto-join every calendar meeting, email invitees to sign up, keep inviting itself after being blocked, and send notes to people who did not know they were signed up; one user cites a class action over recording without consent[1][2][3][4]
- Transcription struggles with accents and mixed languages and can split one speaker into two; one user moved to Grain for accuracy[1][2][3]
- Summaries are weaker than alternatives: users find them worse than Zoom's, so-so, or walls of text that need cleanup[1][2][3]
- Pricing: a paying user saw prices rise while transcription hours were cut, and another found the paid tier too expensive[1][2]