User reviews indicate that Gong receives generally positive feedback, with users praising its ease of use and AI integration capabilities for analyzing sales calls and coaching representatives. The platform earns high ratings across review sites, with a 4.8 rating from over 6,000 reviews on G2 and 4.8 from 202 reviews on Gartner. However, some users express frustration with technical issues, particularly noting delays of up to 60 minutes for recorded calls to become available after completion.

Avoma users appreciate the platform's effectiveness in replacing manual note-taking during client calls and meetings, allowing for more focused conversations. Reviews highlight the tool's ease of use and practical functionality for managing meeting notes and tasks, with users describing it as a time-saving collaboration solution. The platform maintains solid ratings with 4.6 out of 5 stars from over 1,300 reviews on G2 and an 8.3 out of 10 rating on TrustRadius.

For more detailed reviews and information, readers can explore 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Gong excels as a conversation intelligence platform focused primarily on sales teams and revenue operations. Its strengths include comprehensive call analytics, robust sales coaching capabilities, and extensive integrations with over 250 platforms. However, it comes with significant drawbacks including high enterprise pricing, occasional processing delays, and privacy features that can obscure useful information.

Gong is best suited for established sales organizations with substantial budgets who need deep conversation analysis and sales performance insights. The platform requires annual commitments and significant investment, making it impractical for smaller teams or individual users. While its integrations are numerous, many rely on third-party connections rather than native functionality, limiting seamless workflow execution.

Avoma positions itself as an all-in-one meeting assistant with strong transcription accuracy and organized note generation across various meeting types. Its advantages include accessible pricing with a free tier, reliable transcription quality, and good integration support for common business tools. The platform's weaknesses include complexity that may overwhelm simple use cases, occasional technical issues with meeting bots, and dense transcript outputs that can be difficult to scan quickly.

Avoma works well for small to medium-sized teams across sales, customer success, and general business functions who need meeting productivity without enterprise-level complexity. Its tiered pricing structure makes it accessible to various organization sizes, though higher tiers become expensive for smaller teams. Like Gong, many integrations depend on third-party services like Zapier, and both platforms ultimately provide limited actionable workflow automation beyond basic data capture and sync.

Why users switch away from Gong or Avoma

Users switch away from Gong primarily due to its high cost structure. The platform requires significant financial investment with an annual platform fee of around $5,000 for small teams plus $1,400-$1,600 per user per year, with additional onboarding services costing approximately $7,500. This enterprise-level pricing with no monthly payment options creates a barrier for smaller organizations or teams with limited budgets, especially when compared to alternatives that offer more accessible pricing tiers.

Technical performance issues drive users to seek alternatives, particularly regarding call processing delays and transcription accuracy problems. Users report experiencing lags in call processing that can disrupt workflow efficiency, while occasional transcription inaccuracies affect the reliability of the AI-generated insights that form the core value proposition of the platform.

The platform's privacy and access limitations create operational friction that prompts user migration. Gong's privacy features, including phone number redaction capabilities, sometimes hide information that users consider necessary for their sales processes. Additionally, the lack of a dedicated desktop application limits user access options, as the platform only operates through web browsers rather than providing installable Windows or Mac applications.

Users switch away from Avoma because the platform can be overly complex for simple transcription needs. Some users find it to be "not a basic transcriber" and describe it as a "hefty platform" that represents overkill for individual users or those with straightforward requirements who just need meeting transcriptions without additional features.

Technical issues create frustration for users during critical meetings. Users report that the bot sometimes joins meetings late, causing missed content at the beginning of sessions. Additionally, there are occasional problems with speaker identification accuracy, which can make transcripts confusing when trying to attribute comments to specific participants.

The detailed transcripts that Avoma generates can be difficult to review efficiently. While comprehensive, users find that the transcripts are dense and challenging to skim quickly, making it time-consuming to extract key information or action items from lengthy meeting records.

FAQs

Would Gong work for in-person meetings? What about Avoma? Yes, both tools work for in-person meetings. Gong supports capturing face-to-face meetings via its mobile app, which is useful for live meetings or field sales. Avoma also works for in-person meetings through its mobile app, which can record offline/in-person meetings for later transcription.

What do users say about the quality of transcriptions? Avoma users report high transcription accuracy at around 95%, even with jargon or accents. However, some users note that transcripts can be dense and difficult to skim quickly, and there are occasional speaker identification issues. For Gong, users report occasional transcription inaccuracies, though the platform is generally praised for providing rich call analytics including transcripts.

Do these tools help a user follow up with action items from the meeting? How so? Yes, both tools help with follow-up action items. Avoma generates organized notes broken into topics including next steps, automates follow-up emails, and provides actionable insights. Gong includes an automation engine that can generate follow-up tasks automatically and trigger deal alerts, helping streamline sales processes.

Do these tools integrate with software like Hubspot, Salesforce, or Linear? Both tools offer strong integrations. Gong has extensive integrations with 250+ tools, including native connections to Salesforce, HubSpot CRM, Slack, Zoom, and other CRM and productivity tools. Avoma connects with calendars and CRMs including HubSpot and Salesforce, and also integrates with Notion via Zapier. Both platforms sync meeting information directly into CRM systems.

Another alternative: Circleback

Circleback provides best-in-class AI-powered meeting notes and automations. We support over 100 languages and automatic participant identification in both in-person and online meetings.

• Automatically-identified and assigned action items

• AI-enabled search across all meetings

• Automations with 100+ app integrations

• Industry-leading security with SOC 2 Type II, EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, and HIPAA compliance

• Ability to capture both online and in-person meetings with desktop and mobile apps