Book a demo

Product

AI AgentsAI SafetyHelpdeskSelf-Service PortalSocial Media AIReturns & Exchanges

Results

Customer Stories50% Performance GuaranteeTrust Center

More

PricingMigrationPartnersLog in
Book a demo
For teams evaluating Ada (ada.cx), the enterprise AI agent platform

Ada CX is built for enterprise volume. Most teams shopping it sit below the line.

Ada, at ada.cx, is one of the most mature AI agent platforms in the category. Founded in 2016, it runs multilingual, multichannel support for names like Monday.com, Pinterest and Cebu Pacific, and it hands conversations off into more than a dozen helpdesks and contact centers. Almost none of that is the reason teams end up shopping for an alternative. Two structural facts are. Ada is an agent layer that runs on top of the helpdesk you already pay for, not a replacement for it, so it is an addition to your bill. And it is scoped and priced for very high conversation volume, so below a certain line you are not the customer, however good the product is. This guide defines five criteria before scoring anyone, ranks seven alternatives with pricing verified against vendor pages on 28 July 2026, names a genuine strength for every platform including Ada, and ends with a decision tree instead of a verdict.

By Amit RG, Founder, Richpanel Published 2026-07-28 Updated 2026-07-28 ~12 min read
View as Markdown →
AR
Amit RG is the founder of Richpanel, the AI-native helpdesk serving 3,000+ brands. He sits in vendor bake-offs against most of the platforms compared here, including the standalone enterprise agent layers, and the criteria below are the ones his own team uses when a prospect asks how the architectures actually differ. Every pricing figure in this guide was read off the vendor's own page on 28 July 2026, or is labelled as a reported third-party figure where the vendor publishes nothing. On X: @realamitrg.
The answer first

Seven alternatives, and the one line that sorts them.

If you run enterprise volume across many languages and a contact center voice stack, Ada is a defensible answer and you should shortlist it seriously. If you do not, the useful question is not "which Ada competitor" but "which architecture": add an agent layer on top of the helpdesk you already pay for, or replace both with one platform where the AI is the primary handler. The table sorts every option on exactly that.

Platform Architecture Published price (28 Jul 2026) Entry point Best for
Richpanel AI-native helpdesk. AI agents and helpdesk are one product ~$0.20 per AI-resolved conversation, $200/mo floor, plus $99 per seat No volume floor DTC and mid-market teams that want the AI to resolve the repeat work and no second helpdesk bill
Ada (ada.cx) Agent layer on your helpdesk or contact center Not published. Demo form only[1] Reported enterprise scale[4] Large enterprises with multilingual volume and a contact center voice stack they will not move
Intercom Fin Agent layer, runs standalone or on Intercom $0.99 per resolution. No seat fee standalone. $29/seat with the Intercom helpdesk[5] 50 outcomes per month[5] Teams that want to keep their helpdesk and start an agent layer this week
Lorikeet Agent layer on Zendesk, Intercom, HubSpot, Front, Salesforce $1,500/mo (Start) or $4,000/mo (Scale) in credits. $0.95 or $0.80 per chat, email or SMS resolution[6] Start plan targets under 5,000 monthly tickets[6] Complex or regulated support where the vendor publishing its rate card matters
Gorgias Ecommerce helpdesk with an AI Agent add-on Ticket-based plans, unlimited seats. AI Agent billed per automated resolution on top[7] Low. Entry tier is small[7] Shopify-first brands that want the widest ecommerce app marketplace
Zendesk AI Helpdesk with AI agents bundled into every Suite plan Suite Team $55, Suite Professional $115 per agent per month annual. Copilot $50 per agent. Automated resolutions metered above the plan allowance[8] Low Large organizations standardizing one vendor across many functions
Decagon Agent layer on your helpdesk Not published. Demo only[9] Enterprise Enterprises that want deep agent configuration tooling and automated QA on the agent itself
Sierra Agent layer, multichannel including voice Outcome-based. "Pay for a job well done." No figures published[10] Enterprise Enterprises that want the vendor's revenue tied to resolved outcomes

Prices read off each vendor's own pricing or product page on 28 July 2026, except where the cell says the figure is not published. Vendor pricing changes often. If a cell no longer matches reality, email amit@richpanel.com and it gets corrected. Richpanel is one of the eight platforms here, so read this as a better-sourced starting point than a vendor listicle, not as a neutral analyst report.

Start by giving Ada its due

Ada is not the weak product in this comparison. It is the specialized one.

Ada has been building conversational automation since 2016, and reports more than 550 AI agents deployed and billions of interactions powered, both figures drawn from third-party reporting of Ada's own numbers rather than from a page we could verify today.[4] What is verifiable on its own site is the customer list: Monday.com, Pinterest, Cebu Pacific, IPSY, Barnes & Noble, Sky, Grab and Life360.[3] That is a real maturity signal, and it is the kind of signal a CTO signing off on a customer-facing system actually weighs.

Three things about Ada are genuinely strong and worth naming before any criticism lands.

Depth of handoff. Ada's integrations page documents connections to Zendesk, Salesforce, Freshworks, Kustomer, Gladly, Gorgias, Help Scout, ServiceNow, Genesys, NICE CXone, Amazon Connect, Twilio Flex, Microsoft Dynamics, Dixa and Aircall.[2] Most of those come in two flavors: content ingestion, which pulls your knowledge base in to inform the agent, and handoff, which routes a live conversation to a human inside that system with context intact. Building that many production-grade handoffs is unglamorous work, and very few vendors have done it at that breadth.

Voice and contact center fit. Ada treats voice as a first-class channel, not a roadmap item, with handoffs into Genesys, NICE CXone, Amazon Connect, Twilio Flex and Aircall.[2] If your highest-CSAT channel is phone and your contact center is not moving, that alone can decide the shortlist. It is also a category where Richpanel does not compete on equal terms: we integrate with Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall rather than hosting voice ourselves.

Enterprise governance and reach. Ada's site claims HIPAA, SOC 2, GDPR and AIUC-1 compliance and deployment across 85+ countries, with multilingual coverage documented as a first-class platform feature rather than a translation bolt-on.[3] For a global brand handling regulated conversations in twenty languages, that is exactly the checklist a procurement team runs.

So this is not an article about a bad product. It is an article about a scoping mismatch. The buyers who end up shopping are almost never the ones who tried Ada and found the AI weak. They are the ones who worked out, usually late in the process, that the platform was built for a company several sizes larger than theirs.

The two facts that decide the shortlist

You still pay for the helpdesk underneath. And there is a floor.

Fact one: Ada is a layer, not a replacement. Every one of those helpdesk connections is either an ingestion or a handoff. That is the architecture working as designed: Ada resolves what it can and passes the rest to a human sitting inside Zendesk, Salesforce, Gladly, Kustomer or a contact center.[2] It is the right design for an enterprise that has already standardized its support stack and has no intention of moving it. The commercial consequence is simply arithmetic: the Ada contract lands on top of the helpdesk seats you already buy. When you build the comparison spreadsheet, both lines have to be in it, or you are comparing an agent layer's price against a platform that includes the helpdesk and calling that a like-for-like.

This is the single most common modelling error we see in bake-offs. A buyer prices an agent layer at, say, $1 a resolution, prices an all-in platform at a lower per-conversation rate, decides the gap is smaller than expected, and then forgets that only one of the two numbers already contains the helpdesk. Put the seat licence in the same cell and the comparison changes shape.

Fact two: the volume floor, and an honest note about it. Ada has long been reported to state on its own pricing page that it is a good fit for companies with at least 300,000 annual customer service conversations, roughly 25,000 a month. That figure is quoted across the third-party literature and is the number most buyers arrive with.[4] We could not verify it on the live page. As of 28 July 2026, ada.cx/pricing carries no plan tiers, no dollar figures and no fit threshold of any kind. It is a demo booking form.[1]

Treat the 300,000 figure, and the reported contract range of roughly $100,000 to $300,000 or more annually at enterprise scale, as third-party reporting rather than a vendor-published fact.[4] The directional point survives the caveat regardless: Ada does not publish an entry price, does not offer a self-serve trial, and requires a sales conversation before you learn whether you are in range. For a team at 4,000 conversations a month, that alone is the answer.

One more question worth asking Ada directly, because it changes the economics more than the headline rate does: what is the billable unit? Third-party reporting says Ada charges per conversation handled rather than per conversation resolved, having moved away from an outcome model because enterprise buyers preferred predictable volume-based costs.[4] If that is accurate for your contract, the meter runs on conversations the AI does not close, which is a materially different deal from Fin's $0.99 per resolution or Lorikeet's per-resolved-ticket rate. Get the definition in writing.

Defined before the ranking

Five criteria, weighted for a team below the enterprise line.

These are operational, so two evaluators would score a vendor the same way. The weights reflect the reader this guide is written for: a CX or support lead who looked at Ada, liked the product, and needs to work out what to do at their actual volume.

01

Architecture (weight: high)

Is this an agent layer that runs on top of a helpdesk you keep paying for, or a platform where the AI agents and the helpdesk are one product? Operational test: after you sign, how many vendors send you an invoice for handling customer conversations? One or two? Neither answer is wrong, but the answer determines your total cost of ownership and how many handoff seams exist between the AI and the human.

02

Volume floor and accessibility (weight: high)

What is the smallest real commitment that gets you into production: a stated minimum, an annual contract size, a trial, or nothing at all? A platform that will not quote you until you clear an enterprise threshold is not a shortlist item for a team below it, regardless of quality. Score this on the published minimum, not on what a rep says on a first call.

03

Pricing model and its transparency (weight: high)

Two separate questions. What is the billable unit: a conversation handled, a conversation resolved, an outcome, a seat, or a ticket? And is the rate published where you can read it without a sales call? Per-handled-conversation billing charges you for work the AI did not finish. Per-resolution billing aligns better but needs a written definition of resolution. Published rates let you model before you commit; contact-sales pricing does not.

04

Action execution depth (weight: medium)

Can the AI actually issue the refund, cancel the subscription, edit the order and change the delivery address as validated, policy-bounded operations, or does it retrieve an answer and hand off? Ada documents this properly through Actions (external API calls), Processes and Playbooks.[2] The differentiator in practice is not whether a vendor can call an API, it is how deep and pre-built the commerce integrations are, and whether the action runs as typed parameters against a policy or as free text a model generated.

05

Time to value and who does the setup (weight: medium)

How long from signature to the AI handling live conversations, and does the work fall on your team, a vendor services engagement, or the vendor's own tooling? A platform that needs a multi-week solutions engagement before it answers a ticket carries a real cost that never shows up on the price page. Ask for the deployment plan in weeks, with named owners, before you sign.

Criteria 1 to 3 carry the most weight because architecture, floor and pricing shape are what actually decide whether a team below enterprise scale can buy at all. Criteria 4 and 5 decide fit once the commercials work.

Where each one wins

The situation where I would send a buyer to each of these.

For every platform, a specific situation where it is the better choice than Richpanel. If your situation matches, take it seriously.

1. Richpanel

Richpanel is the AI-native helpdesk: you get an AI support team that resolves the repeat work end to end, and the helpdesk your humans work in, as one product. Pricing is about $0.20 per AI-resolved conversation with a $200 per month floor, plus $99 per seat for the humans, and there is no enterprise volume threshold to clear. Deployment runs as a 30-minute proof of concept built live on your data during the demo, a two-week pilot, then a four-week full deployment, and the AI agents carry a written guarantee: 50% resolution in 30 days or your money back. In production that has looked like a wellness brand where AI sends 63% of every customer message and closes routine conversations end to end with no human touch, at 4.39 out of 5 CSAT against a team-wide 4.33.[11] Ridge cut cost per ticket by 70%, about $500,000 a year, with CSAT moving from 88% to 96%. Where we are weaker than Ada: we do not host voice, we integrate with Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall, and Ada's multilingual depth, contact center handoffs and global enterprise deployment record are more established than ours. If those are your top criteria, Ada is the fair pick.

2. Intercom Fin

Fin is the most accessible agent layer in the category and the cleanest answer for a team that wants to keep its current helpdesk. Pricing is public and unusually simple: $0.99 per resolution, procedure handoff or disqualification, with a stated minimum of 50 outcomes a month, no seat fees when run standalone, no implementation or platform fees, and a 14-day trial with no card required.[5] It runs on top of Salesforce, HubSpot, Freshworks and other platforms, and Intercom states that setup takes under an hour.[5] Choose Fin over Richpanel if you are not willing to change helpdesks and you want an agent layer live this week with a published rate and a trial. The honest trade-offs: you are still paying for the helpdesk underneath, and Intercom is being acquired by Salesforce, a deal signed in June 2026 and not yet closed, which introduces roadmap uncertainty worth asking about. We cover that in what the Fin acquisition means for support teams.

3. Lorikeet

Lorikeet does the thing almost nobody else in the agent-layer tier does: it publishes its rate card. Start is $1,500 a month for $18,000 a year in credits, Scale is $4,000 a month for $48,000, chat, email and SMS resolutions run $0.95 and $0.80 respectively, voice runs $1.50 and $1.20 for resolutions up to three minutes, and there are no per-seat, implementation or platform fees. It integrates with Zendesk, Intercom, HubSpot, Front and Salesforce, carries SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001, and offers a HIPAA BAA on Scale and above.[6] Choose Lorikeet over Richpanel if your support is complex or regulated, you want to keep your existing helpdesk, and the ability to model your bill from a public page before any sales call is worth more to you than consolidating onto one platform. For a team under 5,000 monthly tickets shopping Ada, this is the most directly comparable published-price option on the list.

4. Gorgias

Gorgias is the most Shopify-native option here, with the widest ecommerce app marketplace and deep out-of-the-box integration into the Shopify order and customer model. It prices by ticket rather than by agent seat, so seats are effectively unlimited, and the AI Agent is available on every plan and billed only when it resolves a conversation.[7] Choose Gorgias over Richpanel if you are a Shopify-first brand whose top priority is the largest catalogue of pre-built ecommerce app integrations. The trade-off worth modelling: an AI resolution is billed on the AI meter and also consumes a ticket from your plan allowance, so the real per-resolution cost is higher than the AI rate alone once you are over your ticket bundle.[7] Our Gorgias alternatives comparison works through that math.

5. Zendesk AI

Zendesk is the broadest platform on this list and the safest procurement answer in most large organizations. As of July 2026, Suite Team is $55 per agent per month and Suite Professional is $115 on annual billing, AI agents are bundled into every Suite plan with automated resolutions metered above the included allowance, and Copilot is $50 per agent per month.[8] Choose Zendesk over Richpanel if you are standardizing one vendor across many functions beyond customer-facing CX, such as IT service management and internal help desks, or if a proven-platform reputation is what your leadership needs to sign off. The trade-off is cost stacking: seats, plus Copilot, plus metered resolutions above the allowance, plus Talk for voice as a separate product. Our Zendesk alternatives comparison breaks down the full stack, and the Zendesk AI agents guide covers what its agents do and do not resolve.

6. Decagon

Decagon competes directly in Ada's enterprise tier and has built serious depth in the operational layer around the agent: configuration tooling, automated QA on the agent's own output, and rapid iteration across the agent lifecycle. Its published customer results include 70% chat and voice resolution at Chime and an 80% deflection rate at Duolingo.[9] Choose Decagon over Richpanel if you are an enterprise that already has a helpdesk you will not move, you want the deepest agent configuration and QA tooling available, and a contact-sales procurement cycle is normal for you. The trade-off is the same one Ada carries: pricing is not published, so you cannot model before a sales conversation, and the helpdesk bill underneath does not go away.

7. Sierra

Sierra prices on outcomes, described on its own site as "pay for a job well done" and "only pay for the value Sierra delivers", which is the most buyer-aligned billing philosophy in the enterprise tier.[10] It deploys across chat, SMS, WhatsApp, email, voice and ChatGPT, and its Ghostwriter tooling builds a production-ready multilingual, multichannel agent from uploaded material.[10] Choose Sierra over Richpanel if you are an enterprise that wants the vendor's revenue tied to resolved outcomes and needs voice and messaging breadth in one agent. The trade-off: no figures are published, so the outcome definition and the effective rate are both negotiated, and like Ada and Decagon it is a layer rather than a replacement.

A decision tree, not a verdict

Find the line that describes you.

There is no single best Ada alternative. There is a best one for your volume, your channels, your helpdesk situation and how much procurement friction you can absorb. Map yourself to a line.

Two of those seven lines do not say Richpanel and one of them says stay with Ada. That is the point. If a single name appeared on every line you would be reading marketing again.

Run these before you sign anything

Six tests that cut through the pitch.

Whichever shortlist you land on, run all six on every vendor including Ada and including us. The longer version is our 40-question vendor RFP template.

1. Define the billable unit in writing.

Conversation handled, conversation resolved, or outcome? Who adjudicates a disputed one? A meter that runs on conversations the AI did not close is a fundamentally different deal from one that only charges when the customer's problem is solved.

2. Price the whole stack, not the layer.

Put the agent-layer contract and the underlying helpdesk seats in the same spreadsheet, then add implementation, voice, and any channel add-ons. Year one is the number that matters, and it is usually not the number on the quote.

3. Ask for the published minimum, not the rep's answer.

Annual commitment, contract term, and any volume threshold. If a vendor will not put a floor in writing before the third call, you have learned something about how the renewal will go.

4. Run the agent on 100 of your historical tickets.

Ask for per-response accuracy and a walk-through of the failures, before go-live, against a threshold you agree in advance. A demo on the vendor's curated example proves nothing about your catalogue and your policies.

5. Watch a refund execute as a tool call.

Ask to see the typed parameters and the policy constraints that bound it. Free text saying "I have refunded you" with no validation layer is how a support bot ends up promising something the business cannot honor.

6. Get three references at your volume and vertical.

Not the vendor's biggest logo. Three companies your size, in your category, live for more than six months. That is a more reliable signal than any ranking, this one included.

How this comparison is limited

What this guide cannot tell you.

An honest comparison names its own blind spots. Four apply here.

The claim this guide will stand behind is narrow: Ada is a mature, specialized, enterprise-scoped agent layer, the reason teams shop for alternatives is usually scope and structure rather than AI quality, and the two questions that sort the field are whether you keep paying for a helpdesk underneath and whether the vendor will quote you at your volume.

Frequently asked

Ada CX and its alternatives, in plain English.

What is Ada (ada.cx) and how is it different from a helpdesk?

Ada, at ada.cx, is an enterprise AI agent platform, not a helpdesk. It resolves customer conversations autonomously across chat, email, voice and social, and when it cannot resolve one it hands the conversation off to a human agent inside the helpdesk or contact center you already run. Ada's own integrations page documents handoffs into Zendesk, Salesforce, Freshworks, Kustomer, Gladly, Gorgias, Help Scout, ServiceNow, Genesys, NICE CXone, Amazon Connect, Twilio Flex and Aircall. That architecture is the single most important thing to understand before you price it. Ada is a layer that sits in front of your support stack, so it is an addition to your helpdesk bill rather than a replacement for it. A platform where the AI agents and the helpdesk are one product removes that second line item, which is a different commercial shape even when the AI quality is comparable.

How much does Ada CX cost in 2026?

Ada does not publish pricing. As of 28 July 2026 the ada.cx pricing page carries no plan tiers, no dollar figures and no stated volume threshold. It is a demo booking form, so the only reliable number is the one Ada's sales team gives you for your volume. Third-party sources widely report that Ada charges per conversation handled rather than per resolution, that contracts start in the low tens of thousands of dollars per year and commonly run from about $100,000 to $300,000 or more annually at enterprise scale, and that Ada's pricing page previously described the platform as a good fit for companies with at least 300,000 annual customer service conversations. Treat all of those as reported figures rather than vendor-published ones, and ask Ada directly for the current entry point, the billable unit and any annual minimum. The billable unit matters more than the headline number: paying per conversation handled rather than per conversation resolved means the meter runs even on the conversations the AI does not close.

What is the best Ada alternative for a mid-market or DTC team?

It depends on whether you want to keep your current helpdesk. If you want to keep it and simply add an agent layer, Intercom Fin is the lowest-barrier option at a published $0.99 per resolution with a 50-outcome monthly minimum and no seat fees when run standalone, and Lorikeet publishes tiered plans from $1,500 per month for teams under about 5,000 monthly tickets. If you are willing to replace the helpdesk as well, Richpanel is built for that profile: the AI agents and the helpdesk are one product, so there is no second bill underneath, pricing is about $0.20 per AI-resolved conversation with a $200 per month floor plus $99 per seat, and the deployment comes with a 50% resolution guarantee in 30 days or your money back. If you are a Shopify-first brand that mainly wants the widest ecommerce app marketplace, Gorgias is the honest answer. Score them on your real ticket mix, not on a ranking.

Does Ada replace your helpdesk or sit on top of it?

It sits on top of it. Ada's platform integrations page frames its helpdesk connections in two ways: content ingestion, which pulls your knowledge base in to inform the AI, and handoff, which routes a conversation to a human agent inside Zendesk, Salesforce, Freshworks, Kustomer, Gladly, Gorgias, Help Scout, ServiceNow, Genesys or a contact center platform, carrying the context across. That design is deliberate and it is a genuine strength for a large organization that has already standardized on a contact center stack and does not want to move it. The commercial consequence is simply that Ada is priced as an addition. When you model total cost of ownership, put the Ada contract and the underlying helpdesk seats in the same spreadsheet, because a comparison against a platform that includes both is otherwise not like for like.

Is Ada worth it for a company with under 300,000 conversations a year?

Often not, and that is a scoping judgment rather than a criticism of the product. Ada is engineered for very high volume, multilingual, multichannel enterprise support, with the enterprise governance and contact center integrations that go with it. Below roughly 25,000 conversations a month, the reported entry contract is large relative to the value at stake, the implementation depth is heavier than the problem requires, and much of what you are paying for is capability you will not switch on. The better question at that size is architectural, not vendor-specific: do you want to add an agent layer on top of the helpdesk you already pay for, or replace both with one platform where the AI is the primary handler? Options with published pricing and no enterprise floor, such as Intercom Fin, Lorikeet and Richpanel, exist precisely for the volumes Ada is not built to serve.

What should I ask Ada and every alternative on the shortlist?

Six questions separate platforms that resolve from platforms that demo well. First, what exactly is the billable unit: a conversation handled, a conversation resolved, or an outcome, and who decides which one it was? Second, what is the all-in year-one cost including implementation, the underlying helpdesk seats and any channel add-ons? Third, will you run the agent against 100 of my historical tickets and show per-response accuracy before go-live? Fourth, show me a refund or a cancellation executed as a validated, policy-bounded action with typed parameters, not as free text. Fifth, what is the minimum annual commitment and the contract term? Sixth, connect me with three reference customers at my volume and in my vertical. Vendors that answer all six in writing are the ones worth a pilot.

Which Ada alternative handles voice?

Ada itself is strong here and this is a category where it should be taken seriously. Ada documents voice as a first-class channel with handoffs into Genesys, NICE CXone, Amazon Connect, Twilio Flex and Aircall, which is exactly what a large contact center needs. Among the alternatives, Sierra deploys across chat, SMS, WhatsApp, email, voice and ChatGPT, and Lorikeet publishes a separate voice resolution rate of $1.50 on its Start plan and $1.20 on Scale for resolutions up to three minutes. Richpanel does not host voice itself: it integrates with Aircall, Dialpad and JustCall. If voice is your highest-volume or highest-CSAT channel and you need it native in one pane, weight that heavily and shortlist accordingly.

Sources & references

Where the claims come from.

Inline citations [1] to [11] map to the entries below. Every vendor page was read on 28 July 2026. Entries labelled "reported" are third-party figures we could not verify against the vendor's own site.

  1. Ada pricing page, read 28 July 2026. Contains no plan tiers, no dollar figures and no stated volume threshold. The page is a demo and consultation booking form. ada.cx/pricing
  2. Ada platform integrations and developer documentation, read 28 July 2026. Source for the handoff and content-ingestion integration list (Zendesk, Salesforce, Freshworks, Kustomer, Gladly, Gorgias, Help Scout, ServiceNow, Genesys, NICE CXone, Amazon Connect, Twilio Flex, Microsoft Dynamics, Dixa, Aircall), the channel list (chat, voice, email, social, mobile SDKs), and the Actions, Processes and Playbooks mechanisms for executing external API calls. ada.cx/platform/integrations, docs.ada.cx
  3. Ada homepage and customer stories, read 28 July 2026. Source for the claimed HIPAA, SOC 2, GDPR and AIUC-1 compliance, the 85+ countries figure, the named customer list (Monday.com, Pinterest, Cebu Pacific, IPSY, Barnes & Noble, Malaysia Airlines, Sky, Grab, Life360) and the published customer outcomes such as an 84% automated resolution rate at Tilt. These are Ada's own marketing claims, presented as such. ada.cx
  4. Reported: Ada pricing structure and volume threshold. Multiple third-party reviews and pricing analyses state that Ada's pricing page describes the platform as a good fit for companies with at least 300,000 annual customer service conversations, that Ada bills per conversation handled rather than per resolution, and that enterprise contracts commonly run from roughly $100,000 to $300,000 or more annually with lower entry points reported via marketplace listings. We could not verify any of these on ada.cx as of 28 July 2026 (see source 1), so they are presented as reported figures. Confirm with Ada directly before modeling.
  5. Fin pricing page, read 28 July 2026. $0.99 per resolution, procedure handoff or disqualification; $9.99 per qualification; 50-outcome monthly minimum for standalone use; no seat fees standalone; $29 per seat per month when paired with the Intercom helpdesk; no integration, setup or platform fees; 14-day trial. fin.ai/pricing
  6. Lorikeet pricing page, read 28 July 2026. Start $1,500 per month ($18,000 per year in credits), Scale $4,000 per month ($48,000 per year); chat, email and SMS resolutions $0.95 and $0.80; voice $1.50 and $1.20 for resolutions up to three minutes; routing and automated QA $0.30 and $0.25; no per-seat, implementation or platform fees; Zendesk, Intercom, HubSpot, Front and Salesforce integrations; SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001, HIPAA BAA on Scale and above; Start targets under 5,000 monthly tickets. lorikeetcx.ai/pricing
  7. Gorgias pricing, read 28 July 2026, plus third-party breakdowns. Gorgias's own page states helpdesk plus AI Agent on one platform, ticket-based rather than per-agent pricing, and AI Agent charged only when it resolves a conversation, with voice and SMS as usage-scaled add-ons. The specific tier prices, the per-resolution rate and the fact that an AI resolution also consumes a plan ticket are drawn from third-party pricing breakdowns because the tier table renders client-side; verify current figures with Gorgias. gorgias.com/pricing
  8. Zendesk pricing page, read 28 July 2026. Suite Team $55 and Suite Professional $115 per agent per month on annual billing; Suite Enterprise plus Copilot by quote; Copilot $50 per agent per month; AI agents bundled into every Suite plan with automated resolutions as the billing unit, charged above the plan allowance and only when resolved without escalation to a human. zendesk.com/pricing
  9. Decagon website, read 28 July 2026. No pricing published; demo request only. Source for the published customer outcomes (70% chat and voice resolution at Chime, 80% deflection at Duolingo) and the agent lifecycle, insights and automated QA tooling. decagon.ai
  10. Sierra website, read 28 July 2026. Outcome-based pricing described as "Pay for a job well done" and "Ensure you only pay for the value Sierra delivers", with no figures published. Channels listed as chat, SMS, WhatsApp, email, voice and ChatGPT; Ghostwriter described as building a production-ready, multilingual, multichannel agent. sierra.ai
  11. Richpanel production case study (wellness brand). AI sends 63% of every customer message (5,753 of 9,138), closing routine conversations fully autonomously with no human touch, at 4.39 out of 5 CSAT against a team-wide 4.33. richpanel.com/case-studies/wellness

Version history, v1.0 (2026-07-28): initial publication. All vendor pricing is a snapshot of public documentation as of that date. Last updated July 2026.

You should not need 300,000 conversations a year to hire an AI support team.

Richpanel gives you the AI agents and the helpdesk your humans work in, as one product. No enterprise floor, no second bill underneath. Watch it resolve your real tickets in a 30 minute demo.

Book my 30-min demo →