7 Best Fireflies Alternatives in 2026, Compared

We would begin a Fireflies replacement trial with Fathom because the pricing table makes a usable progression clear. An individual can record, transcribe, summarize, clip, and search calls on Free. Team adds global search across calls and collaboration; Business adds CRM-field sync, deal views, and coaching tools. It also prevents a false price comparison: the published Premium individual rate does not buy Business automation.

The team page describes Ask Fathom over team history and trackers for topics such as objections. We would ask the same question in both Fathom and Fireflies, then open the source calls to see whether the answer is complete. Search is only helpful when the right colleagues can see the right meetings, so check team visibility defaults before inviting the full sales organization.

Capture is changing. Fathom’s device guide supports Mac and Windows recordings and an iOS app for in-person conversations. Its 3.0 guide says the bot-free desktop experience is a phased Mac rollout, with Windows bot-free capture only in a limited Teams alpha. We think Fathom is the strongest first trial here for search and CRM potential, but a team requiring bot-free Windows capture should confirm eligibility before replacing Fireflies.

Free is $0. Premium is $16/user/month annually or $20 monthly; Team is $15/user/month annually with a two-user minimum; Business is $25/user/month annually for CRM-field sync (as of November 2026).

Read AI is worth evaluating if the question spans more than the meeting archive. Its product page describes search and summaries informed by meetings, email, calendar, and CRM context. The pricing page lists enterprise search in Free and premium HubSpot, Salesforce, and webhook integrations on Pro. It also widens the data scope, so a trial should use a mailbox approved for that connection.

Its consent guide separates web mode, which appears in the meeting, from desktop or mobile local capture. Local mode has no joining agent, but also no speaker attribution in the transcript; the user controls whether other participants see a consent prompt. We would test a multi-speaker customer call in both modes before deciding which one the team can use. A search result without trustworthy speaker identity may be too weak for a disputed commitment.

The data help page says model training needs opt-in and that organizations can limit transcript storage. Read’s privacy page describes an attendee notification path for its joining mode. Read AI ties Fathom on points and takes second because its broader search adds email and calendar context, while local-mode consent and CRM mapping need deliberate review.

Free is $0 for five meeting transcripts per month. Pro is $15/user/month annually or $19.75 monthly and lists premium CRM integrations (as of November 2026).

Avoma is the most explicit CRM-first option in this list. The meeting assistant page describes automatic video recording, searchable transcripts, AI notes, and follow-up emails. Its CRM workflow page shows the important sequence: process the call, match it to the relevant CRM record, log a readable summary, and let a rep review anything that needs judgment.

The pricing page lists Startup at $19 per recorder seat monthly when billed annually, with free view-only seats and automatic notes to CRM. That seat model can be cheaper for a team where managers and product partners mainly review calls. The same page puts Global Ask Avoma on Enterprise and sells conversation and revenue intelligence as separate add-ons. We think that is the key buying detail: meeting-level search and CRM notes are available early, while organization-wide answers and deeper sales analysis need a separate budget discussion.

Avoma’s documentation describes consent-aware automatic recording rather than a universal bot-free promise. We would check the actual meeting invite and recording notice your customers see. If the team’s main need is a shared call archive with notes attached to accounts, Avoma deserves a close trial. If Fireflies’ cross-meeting AskFred is the feature you cannot lose, verify Avoma’s search tier before signing.

A 14-day trial is offered. Startup is $19 per recorder seat/month billed annually or $29 monthly; viewers are free (as of November 2026).

Granola is an honest alternative for a team that has decided Fireflies’ full recording archive is more than it needs. Its security page says a user manually starts a meeting, the desktop app captures microphone and computer audio without adding a bot, and the service stores a transcript and notes rather than the audio.

The pricing page lists Basic with AI notes, chat across meetings, shared folders, and templates. Business adds unlimited note history and integrations with Attio, Notion, HubSpot, Affinity, and Zapier. It also lists desktop, iOS, Android, and Apple Watch apps. We would test the specific CRM handoff with a real contact: an integration can send a note, but the team may still need a separate process for opportunity fields, tasks, and reports.

The security page says Granola may use anonymized customer data to improve its own models, with an opt-out; Enterprise starts with that use off. Its export guide documents an owner-by-owner CSV export, not an admin export of the whole team. Granola moves above the clip-focused choices on the combined score: its bot-free capture and shared notes help a team that does not need saved audio, though its CRM handoff remains lighter than the leaders.

Basic is $0. Business is $14/user/month; Enterprise is listed at $35/user/month (as of November 2026).

Grain has a good answer for teams that want to share more than text. Its product page describes recordings, clips, team sharing, and a bot-optional capture path. The pricing page explains that paid recorders can capture and import meetings while free viewers can read and collaborate on shared content.

Grain’s integration directory lists HubSpot and Salesforce. More specifically, its HubSpot help article says the connection is set up once at workspace level, matches an existing HubSpot contact, and requires Business or above. That is the distinction to test against Fireflies: what happens for a meeting with a new participant who is not yet a CRM contact? We would check that case before promising full automatic coverage.

The billing guide lists a personal Pro tier and a Business plan with a two-paid-seat minimum. The pricing page says Grain does not train AI on meeting data. We like the combination of shared clips and free viewers. We rank it below Fathom and Avoma because the CRM path begins at a higher team tier, and because this guide puts searchable answers and CRM record correctness ahead of sharing clips.

Free is $0 for individuals. Pro is $15/month billed annually or $19 monthly; Business is $29/paid seat/month annually or $39 monthly, with a two-seat minimum (as of November 2026).

We would compare Otter.ai when the team’s first task is finding the precise words from a call. Its product page describes searchable meeting knowledge and follow-up work. The pricing page includes live transcription, playback, speaker identification, and AI Chat within and across meetings on Basic. Pro adds advanced search, export, and listed HubSpot and Salesforce integrations. Run one CRM test before moving all recorders.

Otter’s desktop guide documents botless Mac and Windows capture for conferencing apps, dialers, and some messaging calls. The same guide says the recorder is responsible for telling participants and getting any required consent. We would test an hour-long customer call in your own workspace, then ask a cross-meeting question and inspect the cited transcript rather than judging only the summary.

The privacy policy describes recordings and uploaded material as information Otter handles. The capture mode therefore does not answer retention or training questions by itself. Otter earns a mid-list place because the entry price and live transcript are compelling. A team leaving Fireflies for more exact CRM automation should first prove that Otter’s CRM flow matches its data model.

Basic is free with 300 transcription minutes per month. Pro is $8.49/user/month billed annually or $16.99 monthly (as of November 2026).

Fireflies is built around a team finding an answer across recorded calls and sending that result into a CRM. Pantheon’s narrower case starts with a person you already know. On the AI note taker page, a meeting recorded by the Apple-silicon Mac app is listed with attendees; the contact’s Notes tab can show it beside Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage conversations. The same page says you can ask about one meeting using its notes, transcript, recent messages with attendees, and earlier meetings with them. We would use that to check what a prospect promised across a call and a later chat.

For a team searching all customer calls, this is an important boundary. Pantheon is not built as a Fireflies-style team meeting archive that writes automatically to an outside CRM. It does offer a live transcript, summary, and action items from bot-free Mac capture. From an open note, the Mac microphone can also capture an in-person conversation. WhatsApp and iMessage context requires the Mac app; Instagram DMs are outside current coverage. A proposed cross-channel identity match needs approval before histories are joined.

The recorder is invite-only alpha on Apple-silicon Macs, with no Windows or iPhone phone-call recorder. Transcription uses Pantheon’s servers, with an optional on-device path. Pantheon’s privacy guide says the person starting a recording confirms consent and must notify participants. Executives away from their Mac can request a guest Google Meet note taker; this is neither self-serve nor a plan feature. We rank Pantheon below established team archives until its narrower relationship workflow is the actual requirement.

Pantheon does not publish a paid meeting-notes price on its AI note taker page; access is invite-only alpha (as of November 2026).