Close Problems & Issues
SaasThe CRM Built for Growing Sales Teams
Should you use Close?
Try with cautionClose works for some teams, but users report recurring problems (score 62/100). Most reported issues: Very expensive, especially for calling features; New lead page update caused productivity drop; Call quality issues with slowness and voice distortion. Not a good fit for: Budget-conscious small teams; Teams needing extensive customization; Teams requiring WhatsApp/Messenger integration. Users most often switch to Pipedrive, HubSpot, Salesforce.
Top problems
- Very expensive, especially for calling features
- New lead page update caused productivity drop
- Call quality issues with slowness and voice distortion
Good for
- High-volume inside sales teams
- SMB sales teams focused on outbound
- Startups with funded growth budgets
Avoid if you are
- Budget-conscious small teams
- Teams needing extensive customization
- Teams requiring WhatsApp/Messenger integration
Common alternatives: Pipedrive, HubSpot, Salesforce
Score breakdown
Close excels for high-volume inside sales teams willing to pay premium prices. The built-in calling is best-in-class but comes with significant costs. Limited customization and integrations constrain flexibility. Not recommended for budget-conscious teams or those needing extensive customization.
Overview
Close is a sales CRM designed specifically for inside sales teams. It features built-in calling, SMS, email sequences, and a power dialer. Founded in 2013 by Steli Efti, Close is a bootstrapped, profitable, 100% remote company focused on eliminating manual data entry and streamlining sales workflows.
Signals & Issues
Patterns extracted from real user feedback — not raw reviews.
Close is described as 'a very expensive platform, especially if you want calling features.' Growth plan starts at $99/user/month, and Scale at $139/user/month. Add-ons like AI Call Assistant cost $50/month plus $0.02/minute usage fees. Small startups find it difficult to afford, particularly when only using basic lead management.
After Close introduced a new lead-page design, users reported significant productivity drops. Complaints include: crucial functions missing, bugs appearing frequently, high latency/increased loading time, no overview in dropdowns, and difficulty in general use. Support responded with templates instead of taking problems seriously.
Users experience call issues including slowness, voice distortion, and missing call time details. The power dialer sometimes won't allow sending messages to certain leads, displaying errors that tell users to 'just contact Close support.' Performance during calls has been criticized as slow.
Users express frustration with limited customization options in Close. The platform 'won't prioritize custom features for you, so if you need anything custom done, it's recommended to go somewhere else.' This impacts workflows and limits adaptability to specific business needs.
Close doesn't connect with platforms like WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. Users criticize the limited integrations which makes it difficult to connect everything smoothly and affects team workflow. Teams seeking social media integration, document management, or campaign management features often look elsewhere.
The tool does not let you opt out of duplicating leads, which makes users take longer to curate each file they want to import. This creates unnecessary cleanup work and frustration during data migration or regular lead imports.
Users find it difficult to understand and utilize email analytics like open rates and campaign effectiveness. Tracking call costs is also challenging. These analytics gaps make it harder to measure ROI and optimize sales processes effectively.
Close has limited functionality for maintaining client relationships after the sales aspect. The platform emphasizes SaaS sales where the use-case is getting the sale and passing off the client. Teams needing full customer lifecycle management find this insufficient.
Users report difficulty in setting up smart views for organizing leads and deals. This core feature, essential for filtering and prioritizing sales activities, has a learning curve that creates friction in daily workflows.
Users complain that support responds with templates instead of taking problems seriously. Response times are sometimes too long. This is particularly frustrating when dealing with bugs from new feature updates that significantly impact productivity.
The AI notes feature sometimes picks up content that users heard entirely differently. This inaccuracy in automated call transcription can lead to misunderstandings and require manual correction, reducing the time-saving benefit of the feature.
It's impossible to cancel a trial within the first 14 days without connecting with support. Users describe this as 'very shady dark UX.' This forces engagement with sales/support even for users who decide the product isn't right for them.
What Users Love
Intuitive interface with smooth transitions
Users describe Close as a 'gamechanger' with praise for the UI and smooth transitions between screens. The interface is designed for sales efficiency, minimizing clicks and keeping focus on closing deals rather than navigating complex menus.
Best-in-class built-in calling and SMS
Close's built-in phone, power dialer, and SMS features are core strengths. Sales teams can call directly from the CRM without third-party tools. Call recording, voicemail drop, and automated dialing streamline high-volume outreach.
Designed specifically for inside sales teams
Unlike general-purpose CRMs, Close is purpose-built for inside sales and SMB sales teams. The workflow is optimized for high-velocity sales with quick lead access, automated sequences, and minimal administrative overhead.
Minimal manual data entry required
Close automatically logs calls, emails, and activities, reducing the manual data entry that plagues other CRMs. Sales reps spend more time selling and less time updating records, which increases productivity.
Powerful email sequences for outreach
The email sequence feature allows automated multi-touch outreach campaigns. Users can set up personalized sequences that run automatically, with tracking for opens and replies. Particularly valued for cold outreach campaigns.
Bootstrapped company with sales expertise
As a bootstrapped, profitable company founded by sales experts, Close understands the sales process deeply. The team creates content and features informed by real sales experience, and the company culture values customer success.
Pricing Plans
Users: 3 users max
Storage: Not specified
Limitations: No power dialer, No workflow automation, No predictive dialer, 3 user maximum
Users: Unlimited users
Storage: Not specified
Limitations: No predictive dialer, No custom roles, Limited reporting
Users: Unlimited users
Storage: Not specified
Limitations: Still limited integrations compared to HubSpot/Salesforce
Users: Per organization
Storage: N/A
Limitations: Usage-based pricing can add up quickly for high-volume calling teams
Features
Communication
- Built-in calling
Core strength, all plans
- Power dialer
Professional and above
- Predictive dialer
Enterprise only
- SMS messaging
All plans
Automation
- Email sequences
All plans
- Workflow automation
Professional and above
AI
- AI Call Assistant
$50/mo + $0.02/min add-on
- AI Email Assistant
Professional and above
Integrations
- WhatsApp integration
Not available
Customization
- Custom fields
Limited flexibility
- Custom objects
Enterprise only
Admin
- Role-based access
Enterprise only
Who Should Use This?
Good Fit
High-volume inside sales teams
Close's power dialer, automated sequences, and built-in calling are designed for inside sales teams making high volumes of calls. If your team lives on the phone and email, Close's workflow optimization will increase productivity.
SMB sales teams focused on outbound
Small to medium businesses doing outbound sales will appreciate Close's purpose-built features. The minimal data entry, automatic logging, and sequence automation reduce admin overhead significantly.
Startups with funded growth budgets
If budget isn't the primary constraint, Close delivers excellent sales-focused functionality. The Startup plan at $49/user works for tiny teams, and the platform scales as you grow (with corresponding cost increases).
Inside sales teams
Built for high-velocity sales. Power dialer, SMS, email sequences - all in one. Inside sales teams love Close's calling features.
Neutral
Teams already using multiple sales tools
Limited integrations mean you may still need separate tools for messaging, social selling, or advanced analytics. Close works well as a calling/email hub but may not consolidate your entire stack.
Field sales teams
Less suited for field sales. Close is phone-centric - field reps may prefer Pipedrive or Salesforce with mobile features.
Avoid
Budget-conscious small teams
Close is expensive, especially for calling features. At $99/user/month for Growth and add-on costs for AI features, small teams with limited budgets will find better value in alternatives like Pipedrive or HubSpot's free tier.
Teams needing extensive customization
Close 'won't prioritize custom features' for individual customers. If your business requires custom fields, workflows, or unique configurations, you'll be frustrated by the platform's limitations. Consider Salesforce or Zoho for flexibility.
Teams requiring WhatsApp/Messenger integration
Close doesn't connect with WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. If your sales process relies on these messaging platforms, Close will create workflow gaps. Look at HubSpot or dedicated messaging CRMs instead.
Full customer lifecycle management needs
Close emphasizes sales-to-close with limited post-sale functionality. If you need to manage ongoing client relationships, renewals, and customer success, you'll need supplementary tools or a different CRM entirely.
Marketing teams
No marketing automation. Close is pure sales CRM. Marketing teams need HubSpot or add-on marketing tools.
Regret Patterns
Common buyer's remorse scenarios reported by users.
Users who were productive with the old interface found that Close's forced new lead-page update caused significant workflow disruption. Crucial functions went missing, bugs appeared, and loading times increased. Reverting wasn't an option, leaving users stuck with a worse experience.
Teams signed up attracted by base pricing, only to discover essential features like AI Call Assistant require additional $50/month plus per-minute charges. Outbound calling minutes, premium numbers, and other add-ons inflated the actual cost well beyond advertised pricing.
After implementation, teams discovered Close won't prioritize custom features. Their specific workflow needs couldn't be accommodated, requiring workarounds or accepting limitations. The realization that flexibility isn't available came after committing to the platform.
Teams planned to integrate Close with messaging platforms (WhatsApp, Messenger) or other tools, only to find limited integration options. The expected seamless workflow required manual workarounds or additional tools, reducing efficiency gains.
Users who decided during the trial that Close wasn't right for them couldn't self-serve cancel. Being forced to contact support to cancel a trial felt manipulative and left a negative impression of the company's practices.
Growing companies that needed enterprise features or deeper customization found migrating away from Close to be complex. Data export and rebuilding workflows in a new CRM required significant effort, creating lock-in regret.
When It Breaks Down
Scenarios where this product tends to fail users.
When sales processes evolve to include WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger communication, Close's lack of integration becomes a dealbreaker. Teams either maintain disconnected communication channels or start looking for alternatives that support modern messaging.
When unique business processes need CRM customization, Close's inflexibility surfaces. The platform won't build custom features for individual customers, leaving teams stuck with workarounds or considering more flexible alternatives like Salesforce.
As calling volume increases, the AI Call Assistant's per-minute charges ($0.02/minute) accumulate. High-volume teams may find monthly costs spiral beyond budget, particularly when combined with other usage-based charges.
When the business needs full customer lifecycle management including post-sale support, renewals, and customer success, Close's sales-focused design becomes limiting. Teams need supplementary tools or a more comprehensive platform.
When bugs from new updates impact productivity during crucial sales periods, and support responds with templates rather than fixes, revenue is affected. The 2025 lead-page issues exemplify how platform changes can harm users without recourse.
Growing teams need custom roles, advanced permissions, and governance features only available on the Enterprise tier ($139/user). The jump from Growth to Enterprise pricing for access controls can strain budgets.
Alternatives Users Switch To
HubSpot
8x mentionedCompanies switch to HubSpot for a more comprehensive platform that includes marketing and service. HubSpot's free tier is generous, and the ecosystem offers features Close lacks like social media and broader integrations.
Salesforce
7x mentionedGrowing companies switch to Salesforce when they need enterprise customization and scalability. Salesforce offers the flexibility Close lacks, though at higher complexity and cost.
Freshsales
6x mentionedTeams switch to Freshsales for lower pricing and Freshworks ecosystem integration. Freshsales offers similar built-in phone features at lower cost, though with its own reliability trade-offs.
Apollo.io
6x mentionedOutbound-focused teams switch to Apollo for its prospecting database combined with sequences. Apollo offers more lead sourcing capabilities, making it a one-stop-shop for prospecting and outreach.
Pipedrive
5x mentionedTeams wanting better pipeline switch to Pipedrive. Gain: visual pipeline, more intuitive. Trade-off: weaker calling features.
Copper
5x mentionedGoogle Workspace users switch to Copper for seamless Gmail integration. Copper fits naturally into Google workflows where Close requires more context-switching between tools.
Salesforce
4x mentionedGrowing teams switch for scale. Gain: unlimited customization, ecosystem. Trade-off: complex, expensive.
Apollo
4x mentionedTeams wanting prospecting switch to Apollo. Gain: better lead database, sequences. Trade-off: less CRM depth.
Frequently Asked Questions
See how Close compares in our Best CRM Software rankings, or calculate costs with our Budget Calculator.
Work at Close or spotted something outdated? Suggest a correction — we verify every change against public sources. See our methodology.