CloseThe CRM that does the work
vs
WoodpeckerCold email and LinkedIn outreach with high deliverability
Comparison · Sales Engagement · weekly run Nov 3
Close vs Woodpecker
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Woodpecker is the stronger AI pick in Sales Engagement: it has a visibility score of 3.6 versus 2.8 for Close.
Choose Close if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (52% vs 0% positive)
- You need SOC 2 Type II or GDPR or CCPA coverage
- Per seat pricing suits your budget better than usage-based
- Best for high-velocity and outbound sales teams
Choose Woodpecker if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (3.6 vs 2.8)
- You need GDPR 100% compliant (vendor claim) or CCPA 100% compliant (vendor claim) or ISO certified storage or CASA certified: tier 2 coverage
- Usage-based pricing suits your budget better than per seat
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | Close | Woodpecker |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 2.8% | 3.6% |
| Change vs last week | down−0.6% | up+2.1% |
| Rank in Sales Engagement | #26 | #21 |
| Share of voice | 1% | 0.6% |
| Mentions this run | 6 | 4 |
| Positive in AI answers | 52% | 0% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Close −0.5pp · Woodpecker +2.1pp over 1 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Woodpecker leads on 2 of 3 engines
ChatGPT
AI Mode
Perplexity
CloseWoodpecker
Head to head in AI answers
0 engine answers name both brands
0Close ranked higher
0Woodpecker ranked higher
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Close | Woodpecker |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per seat | Usage-based |
| Entry price | $19 per seat / mo | Contact sales |
| Free plan | No · 14-day trial | No · 14-day trial |
| Deployment | Cloud (SaaS) | SaaS |
| Integrations | 100+ | — |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type II, GDPR, CCPA | GDPR 100% compliant (vendor claim), CCPA 100% compliant (vendor claim), ISO certified storage, CASA certified: tier 2 |
| Support | Knowledge base, Email support | Chat in the bottom right corner of the app, Book a call, Answers to questions within hours |
| Founded | 2013 | 2015 |
| Headquarters | Austin, Texas, United States | Wroclaw, Poland |
| Employees | 51–200 | 51–200 |
| Funding | Angel | Pre-seed agreement with Xevin Lab (amount not stated) · $0M raised |
| Best for | Founders, small businesses and sales teams that sell through calls, email and SMS | Businesses that do outbound, including B2B sales teams, SaaS businesses and marketing or lead generation agencies |
Plans side by side
Close
Solo$19per user / month (billed monthly; $9 billed annually)
Essentials$49per user / month (billed monthly; $35 billed annually)
Growth$109per user / month (billed monthly; $99 billed annually)
Scale$149per user / month (billed monthly; $139 billed annually)
Woodpecker
EmailCustommonth
MultichannelCustommonth
LinkedInCustommonth
ScaleCustomcustom
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Close
- Best for high-velocity and outbound sales teams
- Straightforward, predictable per-seat pricing
- All-in-one calling, SMS, and email cadences
- Strong customer satisfaction in recent reviews
- Frequently included in CRM shortlists
Woodpecker
Profile in progress.
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 98.8%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Close vs Woodpecker”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/close-vs-woodpecker, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.