Best Close CRM Alternatives 2026

Close CRM built its reputation as the inside sales team’s best friend — a CRM with a phone dialer, email sequences, and pipeline management baked into a single interface. But as teams grow or their needs shift, Close’s limitations start showing. Maybe your team has outgrown the reporting, or you’re tired of paying $99/user/month for features other platforms include at half the price.

Why Look for Close Alternatives?

Pricing climbs fast for growing teams. Close’s Startup plan starts at $49/user/month, but most inside sales teams need the Professional plan at $99/user/month for features like custom activities, power dialer, and call coaching. A 15-person sales team is looking at roughly $17,820/year — and that’s before you hit Enterprise at $139/user/month for predictive dialing and custom objects. Several competitors offer comparable calling and sequencing at 40-60% less.

Reporting and analytics feel thin. Close gives you basic pipeline reports and activity tracking, but building custom reports requires workarounds. If your VP of Sales wants multi-touch attribution, cohort analysis by lead source, or forecasting models, you’ll hit walls quickly. I’ve worked with teams that exported Close data to Google Sheets weekly just to get the dashboards their leadership needed — that’s a sign the tool has been outgrown.

Limited marketing and top-of-funnel tools. Close is deliberately focused on the sales side. There’s no built-in marketing automation, no landing page builder, no lead capture forms. If your company is growing and wants sales and marketing in one platform, Close forces you into integration territory with tools like Mailchimp or ActiveCampaign. That means more subscriptions, more data syncing issues, and more places where leads fall through the cracks.

Integration ecosystem is narrower than competitors. Close has around 100+ integrations through its native marketplace plus Zapier connections. Compare that to HubSpot (1,500+) or Salesforce (thousands on AppExchange). If you rely on niche industry tools or need deep bidirectional syncing, Close’s integration options can feel constraining.

Customization has a ceiling. Close keeps things intentionally simple, which is a strength until it isn’t. You can’t create custom objects, build complex approval workflows, or design intricate automation chains. Teams with non-standard sales processes — multiple product lines, complex quoting, or multi-stage approval requirements — often find themselves fighting the tool instead of working with it.

HubSpot CRM

Best for: Teams that need marketing automation alongside sales

HubSpot is probably the most common destination I see Close teams migrate to, especially when the company is scaling beyond pure outbound sales. The free CRM tier is genuinely useful — up to 5 users get contact management, deal tracking, email tracking, and basic reporting without paying a cent. That alone makes it worth testing before committing.

Where HubSpot really separates from Close is the marketing side. If your team is generating inbound leads through content, paid ads, or email nurture campaigns, HubSpot connects those dots natively. You can see which blog post a lead read before your SDR called them, which emails they opened, and which pages they visited. Close simply doesn’t do this without bolting on other tools. The Sales Hub Professional tier ($100/user/month) adds sequences, custom reporting, and forecasting that rival what Close offers at similar pricing.

The honest downside: HubSpot’s calling features are mediocre. You get basic click-to-call functionality, but there’s no native power dialer or predictive dialer. Teams doing 60+ dials per rep per day will feel the friction immediately. You’ll need to add a tool like Aircall or Orum, which adds $30-50/user/month and introduces another integration to manage. Also, HubSpot’s pricing gets complicated fast — the jump from Starter ($20/user/month) to Professional ($100/user/month) is steep, and marketing contacts pricing can surprise you if your database grows.

For teams making the switch, start with Sales Hub Starter to test the waters. If you need sequences and custom reporting, Professional is where the real value lives. Budget roughly $100-150/user/month for a comparable Close experience once you add a calling integration.

See our Close vs HubSpot comparison

Read our full HubSpot review

Salesforce Sales Cloud

Best for: Scaling teams that need enterprise-grade customization

Salesforce is the obvious choice when your team has outgrown Close’s customization limits. Custom objects, complex automation flows, territory management, CPQ (configure-price-quote) — Salesforce handles organizational complexity that Close was never designed for. If you’re growing from 15 reps to 50+ and need role-based permissions, approval chains, and multi-division reporting, this is where you’ll land eventually.

The reporting alone justifies the switch for many teams. Salesforce’s report builder lets you create virtually any cross-object report with groupings, filters, and calculated fields. Compare that to Close’s relatively rigid reporting, and the difference is night and day. I’ve seen sales ops teams reduce their weekly reporting prep from 4 hours to 30 minutes after moving to Salesforce — the data is just more accessible.

But let’s be real: Salesforce is a project, not a purchase. Budget 4-8 weeks for implementation if you want it done right, and expect to spend $5,000-15,000 on initial setup if you hire a consultant (which you should for teams over 10 people). The UI isn’t as clean as Close’s purpose-built interface. Reps who loved Close’s simplicity will complain about extra clicks and tab-switching. You’ll also need a sales engagement tool like Outreach or Salesloft layered on top to match Close’s sequencing capabilities — Salesforce’s native “Sales Engagement” features in the Enterprise tier are improving but still not as polished.

Start with Professional ($80/user/month) for most inside sales teams. Enterprise ($165/user/month) becomes necessary once you need workflow automation and advanced forecasting. Factor in implementation costs and a 2-3 month ramp-up period for your team.

See our Close vs Salesforce comparison

Read our full Salesforce review

Pipedrive

Best for: Small sales teams wanting visual pipeline management

Pipedrive is where Close teams land when they want something simpler and cheaper, not more complex. The visual pipeline — a Kanban-style board where you drag deals between stages — is genuinely better than Close’s pipeline view. It sounds trivial, but for small teams doing 20-50 active deals, that visual clarity makes a real difference in daily workflow.

Pipedrive’s pricing is its killer advantage. The Advanced plan at $27.90/user/month includes email sequences, workflow automation, and two-way email sync. That’s roughly what you’d need the $99/user/month Close Professional plan for. For a 10-person team, that’s a savings of over $8,500/year. The AI sales assistant (available from the Advanced tier up) is surprisingly useful — it flags stale deals, suggests follow-up timing, and highlights activities that correlate with closed deals.

The catch is calling. Pipedrive added a built-in caller, but it’s only available from the Power plan ($64.90/user/month) and it’s nowhere near as polished as Close’s dialer. No predictive dialing, limited call coaching features, and the integration with your pipeline feels bolted on rather than native. If your reps spend more than 30% of their time on the phone, this will be a step backward from Close.

Pipedrive works best for email-first inside sales teams or hybrid teams that use phone selectively. Start with Advanced ($27.90/user/month) and only upgrade to Professional ($49.90/user/month) if you need revenue forecasting and custom fields on projects.

See our Close vs Pipedrive comparison

Read our full Pipedrive review

Freshsales

Best for: Budget-conscious inside sales teams wanting built-in phone

Freshsales is the closest competitor to Close’s “everything-in-one-place” philosophy for inside sales, but at a significantly lower price point. The Growth plan ($11/user/month) includes built-in phone with call recording, email tracking, and basic workflow automation. That’s remarkable value — you’d need Close’s $49/user/month Startup plan to get comparable functionality.

The Freddy AI lead scoring is a genuine differentiator. Available from the Growth plan, it analyzes contact behavior and engagement to prioritize leads for your reps. Close doesn’t have native AI scoring — you’d need to build custom smart views or use a third-party enrichment tool. For teams processing high lead volumes (500+ new leads per month), this kind of automated prioritization saves real time.

Freshsales also shines if your company uses other Freshworks products. The integration between Freshsales and Freshdesk (customer support) is tight — sales reps can see open support tickets on a contact record, and support agents can see deal status. If your inside sales team also handles renewals or upsells where support context matters, this is a meaningful advantage over Close.

The limitations show up in workflow automation flexibility. Close’s Smart Views and custom automations offer more conditional logic — “if lead hasn’t responded in 3 days AND has visited pricing page, move to sequence B.” Freshsales’ automations are more linear and can feel rigid for complex sales processes. Reporting is also more basic than Close’s, particularly for activity-level metrics like dials-to-conversations ratios.

Start with Growth ($11/user/month) for small teams. Pro ($47/user/month) is where you get multiple sales pipelines, AI-powered deal insights, and the territory management features that growing teams need.

See our Close vs Freshsales comparison

Read our full Freshsales review

Apollo.io

Best for: Outbound-heavy teams that need prospecting + CRM in one tool

Apollo has evolved from a prospecting database into a legitimate CRM-plus-engagement platform, and it’s eating into Close’s territory with outbound-focused teams. The core value proposition is simple: instead of paying for a contact database (like ZoomInfo at $15,000+/year), a sales engagement platform, AND a CRM, Apollo bundles all three together.

The contact database is the star. With 275M+ contacts and solid data accuracy (I’ve seen roughly 85-90% email validity rates in my testing, though it varies by industry), your reps can find and engage prospects without ever leaving the tool. Close has no equivalent — you’d need to pair it with Apollo, Lusha, or similar tools. For teams where prospecting is the bottleneck, not pipeline management, Apollo solves the bigger problem.

Apollo’s email sequencing and deliverability tools are also ahead of Close’s in several ways. Mailbox rotation (spreading sends across multiple email accounts), built-in warmup, and send-time optimization are all included. Close added email sequences but hasn’t invested in the deliverability infrastructure the way Apollo has. If your outbound is 70%+ email-driven, Apollo’s deliverability features could meaningfully improve your reply rates.

Here’s the tradeoff: Apollo’s CRM is functional but thin. Deal management exists, but the pipeline views, custom fields, and reporting don’t match Close’s depth. I’ve seen teams use Apollo for prospecting and top-of-funnel engagement, then push qualified opportunities to a separate CRM for deal management. If you’re running a simple sales process (demo → proposal → close), Apollo’s CRM is fine. If you have a multi-stage process with handoffs, approvals, or complex deal structures, you’ll feel the gaps.

The Professional plan ($79/user/month) is the sweet spot — it includes unlimited email accounts, the full dialer, and advanced sequencing. The Basic plan ($49/user/month) works if your volume is lower.

See our Close vs Apollo comparison

Read our full Apollo review

Outreach

Best for: Mid-market and enterprise sales engagement at scale

Outreach isn’t a direct CRM replacement for Close — it’s a sales engagement platform that handles the communication layer while relying on Salesforce, HubSpot, or another CRM as the system of record. I’m including it because many Close teams are really searching for better sequencing and multi-channel engagement, and Outreach is the category leader there.

The sequence capabilities are significantly more advanced than Close’s. A/B testing subject lines across thousands of sends, branching logic based on prospect behavior (opened email → phone task, no open → different email variant), and trigger-based steps that fire when a prospect visits your pricing page. Close’s sequences are linear by comparison. For teams running 5+ active sequences with 10+ steps each, Outreach’s sophistication translates to measurable conversion improvements — I’ve typically seen 15-25% better reply rates when teams move from basic sequences to Outreach’s optimized workflows.

The revenue intelligence features — deal health scores, pipeline analytics, and conversation intelligence (call recording with AI analysis) — give managers visibility that Close’s reporting can’t match. Outreach can flag deals that are at risk based on engagement patterns, alert managers when a champion goes quiet, and surface coaching moments from recorded calls.

The major downside: cost and complexity. Outreach requires a separate CRM, so you’re paying for two platforms. Pricing is custom and opaque, but expect $100-130/user/month for Outreach alone, plus whatever your CRM costs. There’s also a minimum seat requirement (typically 10+ users) and annual contracts. Implementation takes 3-6 weeks. This is a move for teams that are ready to invest in a more structured sales tech stack, not teams looking to simplify.

Outreach makes sense for inside sales teams of 15+ reps with dedicated sales ops support. If you’re a 5-person team, this is overkill.

See our Close vs Outreach comparison

Read our full Outreach review

Copper

Best for: Google Workspace-native teams wanting CRM inside Gmail

Copper takes the opposite approach from Close — instead of building a self-contained sales hub, it embeds CRM functionality directly into Gmail and Google Workspace. If your team lives in Gmail and Google Calendar, Copper feels less like a separate tool and more like an upgrade to your inbox.

The automatic data capture is Copper’s biggest win over Close. Every email, calendar event, and file shared through Google Workspace gets logged to the relevant contact record without reps doing anything. Close has email sync, but it requires more manual association and doesn’t capture Google Drive activity. For teams where CRM adoption is a constant battle — reps just won’t log their activities — Copper solves the problem architecturally rather than with nagging.

The interface is clean and simple, which is both a strength and limitation. Reps who felt overwhelmed by Close’s dense feature set (calling, email, SMS, pipeline, smart views all competing for screen space) will appreciate Copper’s minimalism. But if your team actually uses all of Close’s features, Copper will feel like a downgrade. There’s no built-in dialer, no power dialing, no SMS, and the email sequencing is basic compared to Close’s.

Copper is the right choice for teams where the sales motion is primarily email-based, meetings-driven (consulting, professional services, agencies), or where relationships matter more than call volume. It’s the wrong choice for phone-heavy inside sales teams doing 50+ dials per day. The Professional plan ($69/user/month) gives you workflow automation and bulk email, which is where most teams should start.

See our Close vs Copper comparison

Read our full Copper review

Quick Comparison Table

Tool	Best For	Starting Price	Free Plan
HubSpot CRM	Marketing + sales alignment	$20/user/month	Yes (up to 5 users)
Salesforce	Enterprise customization & scaling	$25/user/month	No (30-day trial)
Pipedrive	Visual pipeline on a budget	$14.90/user/month	No (14-day trial)
Freshsales	Budget inside sales with phone	$11/user/month	Yes (up to 3 users)
Apollo.io	Outbound prospecting + CRM	$49/user/month	Yes (limited)
Outreach	Enterprise sales engagement	~$100/user/month (custom)	No
Copper	Google Workspace-native teams	$12/user/month	No (14-day trial)

How to Choose

If your main issue with Close is price, go with Freshsales or Pipedrive. Both deliver 80% of Close’s inside sales functionality at 40-70% less per seat. Freshsales is better if phone is central to your process; Pipedrive is better if email and pipeline management matter more.

If you’ve outgrown Close’s reporting and customization, Salesforce is the obvious destination. Yes, it’s more expensive and complex, but it’s the platform you’ll still be using at 100+ reps. If you’re between 10-25 reps and growing fast, make the move now rather than migrating again in 18 months.

If you need marketing and sales in one platform, HubSpot is the answer. The free CRM plus Sales Hub Professional gives you a comparable sales experience to Close with marketing automation included. Just budget for a calling integration.

If your bottleneck is finding prospects, not managing them, Apollo.io is the most efficient option. You’ll consolidate your tech stack from three tools (database + engagement + CRM) down to one.

If your reps live in Gmail and hate switching tools, Copper removes the friction. But only if your sales motion is email and meeting-centric rather than phone-heavy.

If you need enterprise-grade sequencing and don’t mind a two-tool stack, Outreach paired with Salesforce or HubSpot is the most powerful setup. It’s also the most expensive and complex — reserve this for teams with 15+ reps and dedicated ops support.

Switching Tips

Export your data before anything else. Close lets you export leads, contacts, opportunities, activities, and email templates via CSV. Do a full export and archive it before you start configuring your new CRM. I’ve seen companies lose call notes and custom field data because they assumed the migration tool would handle everything.

Map your custom fields first. Close probably has custom fields your team has built over time. Before importing data into your new platform, create corresponding fields there. Mismatched fields are the #1 cause of messy migrations — contact types showing up in company fields, revenue figures dumped into text fields, that kind of thing.

Rebuild sequences, don’t try to “migrate” them. Every platform handles sequences differently. Rather than trying to recreate your Close sequences exactly, take the opportunity to audit and improve them. Which sequences actually drive replies? Which ones have you been running on autopilot for a year with a 2% reply rate? Migration is a natural reset point.

Budget 2-4 weeks for the transition. Week 1: configure the new CRM and import historical data. Week 2: rebuild sequences and automation. Week 3: run both systems in parallel with a small group of reps. Week 4: full cutover and training. Trying to compress this into a weekend almost always creates problems that take months to fix.

Expect a 2-3 week productivity dip. Your reps will be slower in the new tool. Close’s keyboard shortcuts, speed-to-dial workflow, and familiar interface have muscle memory behind them. Build this into your planning — don’t schedule a migration the week before your biggest quarter closes.

Watch out for phone number porting. If you’re using Close’s built-in phone numbers, you’ll need to either port those numbers to your new provider or update your outbound caller IDs. Porting takes 1-3 weeks depending on the carrier. Start this process early so your reps aren’t calling from unfamiliar numbers during the transition.

Don’t forget your integrations. Check which tools are connected to Close via API or Zapier. Each one needs to be reconnected to your new CRM. Make a list, prioritize them, and test each integration before going live. The integration you forgot about is always the one that breaks something important three weeks after migration.

---

Disclosure: Some links on this page are affiliate links. We may earn a commission if you make a purchase, at no extra cost to you. This helps us keep the site running and produce quality content.