Avoma is an all-in-one platform for sales meetings: it records and summarizes calls, scores them, tracks deal risk and forecasts, and books and routes meetings. Teams looking for an Avoma alternative are usually replacing one of those jobs, and the right alternative depends on which one.
This page sorts the options by job, compares them on their own pages as read on 31 October 2026, and gives three tests to run before you trust any tool's AI call scores. The method behind those tests is in our AI call scoring guide.
What Avoma does
Avoma describes itself as one AI tool for note-taking, scheduling, coaching and forecasting, and sells four products (Avoma):
- AI Meeting Assistant: note-taking, follow-up emails, CRM data entry and an AI copilot.
- Scheduler and Lead Router: scheduling, lead qualification and routing.
- Conversation Intelligence: "automating call scoring, personalized coaching, and getting visibility into talk patterns and topic trends."
- Revenue Intelligence: "proactive deal and churn risk alerts, automatic Sales methodology tracking, pipeline inspection and AI win-loss analysis."
Avoma publishes prices. Its pricing page lists the AI Meeting Assistant from $19 per recorder seat per month billed annually, with viewers free, and Conversation Intelligence and Revenue Intelligence add-ons at $29 per seat per month billed annually (Avoma pricing).
Which Avoma job are you replacing?
| If the problem is... | You are replacing | Look at |
|---|---|---|
| Notes and summaries are not good enough, or cost too much | AI Meeting Assistant | Fathom, Fireflies |
| Call scoring is not trusted, or coaching stays at call level | Conversation Intelligence | Gong, Attention, or the three tests below |
| Forecast and deal risk need more depth | Revenue Intelligence | Gong, Clari + Salesloft |
| Reps see the risk and still do not know what to do next on the deal | None of Avoma's jobs | A deal coach (Replicate Labs) |
Most teams that leave Avoma move one job and keep the rest somewhere else.
Signs Avoma is still enough, and signs you have outgrown it
Avoma is often still the right tool when one team uses all four jobs, the per-seat prices fit the budget, and the complaints are about how it is set up. A scorecard nobody trusts can be a scorecard problem before it is a tool problem; the three tests below will tell you which.
The signs that a job has outgrown it are more specific:
- Managers have stopped opening the scores. They review calls by listening, or not at all, and the scorecard data sits unread.
- The forecast lives in a spreadsheet next to the tool. If the CRO rebuilds the number by hand every Monday, the revenue intelligence job is not being done where you pay for it.
- Most seats only use notes. If the add-ons are paid for and the team mostly reads summaries, a dedicated note-taker may cost less.
- Reps can name the risk and not the next move. Alerts fire, deals stay stuck. That is a coaching gap, and more alerts will not close it.
Write down which of these you see before booking any demo. The list becomes your brief, and it keeps the evaluation on the job you are replacing.
Team size tells you which items to expect on that list. A small team whose manager hears most calls mostly needs notes and scheduling; once several managers can no longer hear every call, scoring has to be trusted and the forecast becomes a process, which is where teams usually split the jobs.
Avoma alternatives side by side
| Tool | Main job, per its own site | What it coaches | Where it works | Method support | Manager view |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avoma | Meeting assistant, CI, revenue intelligence, scheduling | Calls, via scoring and coaching | Recorded meetings and pipeline | "Automatic Sales methodology tracking" | Pipeline inspection, risk alerts |
| Fathom | AI notetaking, summaries, AI scorecards | Call moments, via scorecards | Recorded meetings | Not described on the pages we read | Shared visibility across the team |
| Fireflies | Meeting transcription and summaries | Not its focus | Recorded meetings | Not described on the pages we read | Not its focus |
| Gong | Revenue AI OS: recording, forecasting, enablement | Calls and skills, via scorecards and Gong Enable | Calls, emails, deals, accounts | Not described on the pages we read | Boards and forecasts |
| Attention | Recording plus agents that draft and execute next steps | Calls, via custom scorecards | Calls, emails, deals | Scorecards for MEDDIC, BANT or your playbook | Rep performance by role or call type |
| Clari + Salesloft | Forecasting joined to sales engagement | Not described on the forecast page we read | Pipeline and seller workflow | Not described on the pages we read | Team and individual forecasts |
| Replicate Labs | AI sales experts that coach live deals | The deal: the rep's next buyer conversation | Live pipeline, deal by deal | Runs the team's own method (MEDDPICC, Gap Selling, ValueSelling Framework®) | Team read through Bryce, the manager coach |
Meeting notes: Fathom and Fireflies
If Avoma's meeting assistant is the part you use, a dedicated note-taker may be enough. Fathom offers "AI notetaking," is "now available bot-free," and has a "free forever" sign-up; its page also mentions AI Scorecards for coaching moments (Fathom). Fireflies leads with transcription across "100+ languages," speaker recognition and AI summaries, and lets you capture meetings through a bot, Chrome extension, mobile and desktop apps, dialers and file upload (Fireflies).
Both replace notes. Neither replaces Avoma's revenue intelligence.
Conversation and revenue intelligence: Gong, Attention, Clari + Salesloft
Gong is the broadest option. It sells forecasting, account boards, AI call scoring and Gong Enable on its Revenue AI OS, with agents "for pipeline review, coaching, deal risk, and more" (Gong). Gong does not publish prices; licenses are per user plus a platform fee (Gong pricing).
Attention pitches agents that act on what calls reveal: "The next move on every deal, drafted and done. You approve. Attention executes" (Attention). It scores calls against criteria you set and fills CRM fields from calls. We compare it with Gong in detail in Attention vs Gong.
Clari + Salesloft is the forecasting-first option. Clari Forecast, now on Salesloft's site after the two companies merged, promises to "catch risk early" and to trigger next best actions in the seller workflow (Clari Forecast). See Clari vs Gong.
Before you switch call scorers: three tests
If the reason you are leaving Avoma is that nobody trusts the call scores, the next tool's scores need testing too. Our call-scoring research produced three tests that fit in any pilot:
- Rank agreement. Have two strong managers mark a set of calls blind and compare the tool's best-to-worst order with theirs. Judge on ranking; average error can look fine for a scorer that never read the transcript.
- Re-run stability. Score the same calls twice and count how many scores move.
- Expert-to-expert baseline. Your managers will disagree with each other; trained experts in our call-scoring research disagreed on 18% of scores. Measure how far your own managers disagree before you judge a tool's scores.
The full method is in can AI score a sales call, and to run it on one of your calls, talk to us.
Comparing prices across pricing models
The tools on this page price in different ways, so a side-by-side of headline prices misleads. From the pages we read: Avoma charges per recorder seat with viewers free and sells its intelligence products as add-ons; Gong charges per user plus a platform fee and does not publish prices; Fathom has a free-forever sign-up for notetaking. Before comparing numbers, answer four questions for your own team:
- Who needs a seat that records, and who only reads? A model with free viewers favors teams where managers and leaders mostly read.
- Which add-ons do you need to match what you use today? A low base price can grow quickly once the jobs you rely on are added back.
- Is there a platform fee or a minimum? Some tools only make sense above a certain team size.
- What is the billing term? Annual prices and monthly prices are different numbers, and a switch mid-term can mean paying twice.
Put the answers in one row per tool, priced for your actual seat mix, and the comparison becomes fair.
Questions to ask in each demo
Each job needs its own questions. Vendors answer the general ones well; the useful answers come from asking about your own calls and your own pipeline.
| Job | Ask in the demo | A good answer |
|---|---|---|
| Meeting notes | Show me a summary of one of our calls, recorded on your tool, next to our current summary | A summary your reps would send without editing |
| Meeting notes | How do buyers on the call find out they are being recorded? | A clear notice you can match to your own policy |
| Call scoring | Score ten of our past calls before we sign | Scores you can compare with your managers' order of the same calls |
| Call scoring | Can we write the levels for each criterion ourselves? | Yes, in your method's terms, with reasons attached to each level |
| Forecasting | Walk me through how a deal's risk is decided | Evidence you can trace back to a call or an email |
| Forecasting | What does a manager see on Monday morning? | One view, built from the deals, that replaces the spreadsheet |
| Deal coaching | Take one of our live deals and tell the rep what to do next | A specific next conversation, in your method, the rep could act on this week |
If a vendor cannot run the test on your own data during the evaluation, treat that as an answer too.
How to switch without losing call history
Switching one job is mostly a data and habits problem. A checklist that covers the usual gaps:
- Check what you can export on your current plan. Recordings, transcripts, notes and scorecards may each export differently. Do it before the renewal date, while you still have access.
- List the CRM fields Avoma writes to. Note which fields reps and managers rely on, and confirm the new tool fills the same ones, or map them.
- Find every scheduler link. Email signatures, the website, sequences and booking pages. A dead booking link costs meetings quietly.
- Update the recording notice. If the new tool joins calls differently, the wording buyers see may need to change. Check it against your own policy with whoever owns it.
- Run both tools side by side for two weeks on the same calls. Compare the notes and scores directly, then cut over.
- Tell reps what changes for them. Where the recording lands, where the notes go, and what the manager will now see. Reps who do not know quietly fall back on the old habit.
- Cancel at the renewal date, after the exports are done and checked.
The order matters. Teams that cancel first and export second can find the history gone before they look for it.
Worked example: one team splits the jobs (illustrative)
This example is illustrative. The company and details are invented.
Ferrow, a 30-person sales team selling logistics software, uses Avoma for all four jobs. The sales leader has three complaints: the forecast is rebuilt in a spreadsheet every Monday, managers have stopped reading call scores, and the stuck deals at proposal stage stay stuck.
The team writes its brief first. Notes and scheduling work and stay where they are. Call scoring gets the three tests: two managers mark twenty calls blind, the current scores rank them poorly against the managers' order, and the scores move a lot on a second run. That settles it, and they test two other scorers on the same twenty calls.
For the forecast, the leader asks each vendor to build Monday's view from the team's own pipeline. One can, one cannot without a services project.
The stuck deals are a different problem. None of the scoring or forecasting tools tells a rep what to do next on a deal at proposal, so the team pilots a deal coach with one manager's reps for six weeks, measured on how many proposal-stage deals get a dated next step with the buyer.
At the end, Ferrow keeps Avoma for notes and scheduling, moves scoring and the forecast, and adds the deal coach. The Monday spreadsheet goes, and each tool was chosen against a test the team set before the first demo.
Deal coaching: Replicate Labs
Some teams leave Avoma for a reason none of its four jobs covers. The calls are recorded and scored, deals are flagged, and reps still do not know what to do next on the deal. Closing that gap means working each deal with the rep before the next buyer call.
Replicate Labs scores calls too, and stages every deal by buyer evidence each week, so the triage a risk alert gives is covered. What it adds is the next step: the rep sees what each deal is missing, and one click takes them into a call to prepare the next buyer conversation, in the team's own method: with Caty for most teams, or Keenan for teams that run Gap Selling. The rep talks it through; typing is there when they cannot. Managers see the read across the team through Bryce. It works alongside whichever note-taker or recorder you keep. For the category as a whole, see our AI sales coaching guide. Talk to us.
FAQ
What are the best Avoma alternatives?
The right Avoma alternative depends on which Avoma job you are replacing. For meeting notes, look at Fathom or Fireflies. For conversation and revenue intelligence, look at Gong or Attention. For forecasting, look at Clari, now part of Salesloft. If reps see deal risk and still do not know what to do next, a deal coach such as Replicate Labs covers that.
Is Gong better than Avoma?
Gong is broader than Avoma, with forecasting, account boards, AI call scoring and enablement on one platform, and it does not publish prices. Avoma bundles a meeting assistant, conversation intelligence, revenue intelligence and scheduling with published per-seat prices. Which is better depends on which jobs you need and how you weigh breadth against cost.
How do I compare AI call scoring between tools?
Have two strong managers mark a set of calls blind, then run the same calls through each tool and compare their best-to-worst order with the managers'. Score the calls twice to check stability. Judge on ranking, because average error can look acceptable even for a scorer that ignores the transcript.
Is there a free or cheaper Avoma alternative?
Fathom offers a free-forever sign-up for AI notetaking, according to its own site, which covers the meeting notes job. Free plans rarely cover call scoring, forecasting or deal coaching at team scale. For comparison, Avoma's pricing page lists the AI Meeting Assistant from $19 per recorder seat per month billed annually, with viewers free. Plans change often, so check each vendor's pricing page for the job you are replacing.
How do I switch from Avoma without losing data?
Export recordings, transcripts and scorecards before the renewal date, list the CRM fields Avoma fills, and replace every scheduler link in signatures, sequences and your website. Then run the new tool alongside Avoma on the same calls for two weeks before you cut over and cancel.
Can I use Avoma alongside another tool?
Yes, Avoma can run alongside another tool, and many teams do. A common pattern keeps Avoma for one or two jobs, such as notes and scheduling, and moves the rest. The cost to watch is overlap: two tools recording the same call, or two sets of CRM fields that disagree.
Is Avoma good for small teams?
Avoma can suit small teams: it publishes per-seat prices and viewers are free. A small team that mainly uses notes and scheduling should still compare it with a dedicated note-taker, since the intelligence add-ons matter less when one manager can hear most calls.
Does Avoma do deal coaching?
Avoma offers conversation intelligence with call scoring and coaching, and revenue intelligence with deal risk alerts and methodology tracking. That coaching works from recorded calls. Coaching the deal itself, finding what it is missing and preparing the rep's next buyer conversation on a call, is a different job.