How much does Closely cost?

Starter $49/mo ($29 annual) · Growth $127 · Essential $205 · Custom $350+ · self-serve by LinkedIn-account + credits · ~40% off annual

What are the best alternatives to Closely?

Based on documented capability coverage across the Agentic Index 14 point taxonomy, the closest alternatives to Closely among GTM and revenue agents are Jeeva, Sympera AI, Dialog, Lawmatics. Each is graded on the same public evidence, and no vendor pays for placement.

Does Closely support MCP and tool calling?

Partial under the Agentic Index verification standard. Closely publishes some public evidence of tool calling and API or SDK extensibility, but narrower than full Model Context Protocol (MCP) support as defined by the Agentic Index taxonomy. Evidence basis: UNUSUALLY WELL EVIDENCED FOR A PARTIAL, because the limitation is stated by the vendor rather than inferred from an absence. Closely's own support response states plainly: no API, but a webhooks integration that pushes information FROM Clos. Graded from public evidence only against the Agentic Index 14 point capability taxonomy. No vendor pays for placement.

Does Closely have SOC 2, SSO and role based access control?

Partial under the Agentic Index verification standard. Closely publishes some public evidence of security and identity controls, but narrower than the full set of SOC 2, single sign on (SSO) and role based access control (RBAC). Evidence basis: The legal documentation is genuinely better than the certification position, which is unusual. STRONG: a full DPA at closelyhq.com/legal/data-processing-agreement with standard contractual clauses governing any transfer out of the EEA, a co. Graded from public evidence only against the Agentic Index 14 point capability taxonomy. No vendor pays for placement.

Can Closely be self hosted or run in a private VPC?

Partial under the Agentic Index verification standard. Closely publishes some public evidence on deployment and data residency, but narrower than a documented self hosted or private VPC option. Evidence basis: THE EXACT INVERSE OF THE TIDIO CASE, and worth reading against it. DEPLOYMENT CONTROL IS ZERO: vendor cloud only, no region selection, no on premises, no private VPC, and specifically no option to keep the LinkedIn session on infrastructure. Graded from public evidence only against the Agentic Index 14 point capability taxonomy. No vendor pays for placement.

Back to vendors

Closely

Visit site

GTM / revenue agentindependentVerified 2026-06-28

Entry priceStarter $49/mo ($29 annual) · Growth $127 · Essential $205 · Custom from $350 · Agency $999 (unlimited) · ~40% off annualFull pricing detail

LinkedIn and email outreach automation with contact collection, verification, and campaign tracking.

Closely is a LinkedIn outreach and multichannel sales engagement platform built to help B2B teams fill their pipeline and book meetings without doing the prospecting and follow-up by hand. It combines lead sourcing, enrichment, automated outreach, a unified inbox, and CRM sync in one tool.

Sourcing starts on LinkedIn. Closely pulls leads from LinkedIn Search, Sales Navigator, Recruiter, posts, groups, and CSV uploads, with filters for industry, job title, and location, then enriches each lead with details like company size, tech stack, and other real-time data points so reps can target and personalize more precisely.

The core of the product is outreach automation. Closely runs LinkedIn sequences that string together profile visits, connection requests, follow-up messages, and post engagement, and it can fold email steps into the same flow for a coordinated LinkedIn and email cadence. To protect the sending account, it paces activity to mimic human behavior, using smart daily limits, randomized delays, and working hours, and it auto-pauses a sequence when a prospect replies. Its AI sales agents research a lead's company and website and draft personalized, human-sounding messages tailored to the person's role and recent activity.

Replies land in a unified inbox so a rep manages every LinkedIn conversation in one place rather than switching between accounts. Analytics track the full funnel across campaigns, sequences, and teams: connection acceptance, reply rates, meetings booked, and pipeline sourced, with A/B testing to compare messaging and rep performance.

Closely integrates deeply with CRMs including HubSpot, Salesforce, and Pipedrive, syncing DMs, InMails, connection events, and replies onto contact, account, and deal timelines, preventing duplicates and preserving attribution so LinkedIn activity shows up cleanly in reporting and forecasting. Beyond sales, the same automation supports recruiting outreach to source and engage candidates. It is aimed at sales teams, agencies, and founders who want consistent, personalized LinkedIn-led outreach running in the background.

Vendor details

Canonical URL

https://closelyhq.com

Subcategory

Sales — LinkedIn/email outreach

Company status

independent

Use cases & customers

Primary use cases

LinkedIn outreachemail outreachcampaign tracking

Target customers

sales teamsSMB

Deployment options

SaaS

In practice

You're spending your mornings manually pulling leads off Sales Navigator. Closely imports them from LinkedIn Search, Sales Navigator, posts, and CSVs, then enriches each with company size, tech stack, and other data points.

Sending connection requests and timing follow-ups by hand doesn't scale, and you worry about your account. Closely runs LinkedIn sequences with human-like limits and delays, and auto-pauses the moment a prospect replies.

LinkedIn conversations never make it into your CRM cleanly. Closely syncs DMs, InMails, and replies onto contact and deal timelines in HubSpot, Salesforce, or Pipedrive, so every touchpoint is captured for attribution.

Agentic Index coverage score

6.5 / 14 capabilities · 46%

Integrations & Tool CallingDOWNGRADED FROM THE UNSOURCED GRID, which carried Full. Five named CRM connectors (Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Zoho, GoHighLevel) plus Zapier and outbound webhooks. THAT IS ONE ECOSYSTEM CLASS COVERED BROADLY, NOT BREADTH ACROSS CLASSES, which is the distinction this axis turns on: every native connector is a CRM, with no marketing automation, no advertising, no content management and no data warehouse path. Compare tofu in this pass, which earned Full across five distinct classes. The ceiling is structural rather than a roadmap gap: Closely states it has no API and its webhooks push in one direction only, so integration depth is capped at pushing outcomes into a CRM. Action surface is LinkedIn, email and CRM writes. Closely help centre, AppSumo vendor response and CRM integration documentation 2026-07-30	Partial
Workflow OrchestrationReal unattended multi step execution: sequences chain connection requests, messages, InMails, profile visits and email steps across 1 to 50 plus connected LinkedIn accounts, running in Closely's cloud with reply detection advancing or halting the sequence and outcomes pushed to CRM. WHAT KEEPS THIS AT PARTIAL IS THE SHAPE OF THE AUTOMATION: the product is described first party and third party alike as a MULTI ACCOUNT SEQUENCER, meaning a deterministic scheduler where AI is confined to drafting message copy. No goal decomposition, no dynamic replanning, no agent decided branching and no tool selection was documented. FOURTH INSTANCE IN THIS PASS of a vendor carrying a fabricated score that implied agentic parity with platforms that reason, after autobound, champify and tofu, and the most clear cut of the four. Closely product documentation and third party reviews 2026-07-30	Partial
Knowledge Grounding & RAGA substantial DATA asset but not a structured knowledge layer, which is the distinction this axis draws. Closely ships a contact database reported at 600 million plus records, a Sales Navigator scraper, and email and phone enrichment producing verified contact details. Message generation is grounded in the prospect's LinkedIn profile and company details, and inbound webhook payloads including form submissions feed personalisation. WHAT IS ABSENT is any customer owned grounding structure: no brand voice or messaging framework object comparable to tofu's Playbook or Jasper IQ, no ICP or persona model, no signal taxonomy comparable to autobound's 700 plus signals across 35 sources, and no retrieval layer over customer documents. Volume of contact records is not depth of grounding. Closely product documentation and first party blog 2026-07-30	Partial
Human Oversight & GuardrailsDOWNGRADED FROM THE UNSOURCED GRID, which carried Full, and the reasoning matters more than the score. Closely does ship real, configurable guardrails: smart daily limits, randomised delays between actions, and a LinkedIn warm up mode that ramps activity gradually. THE PROBLEM IS WHAT THEY GUARD AGAINST. Every one of these throttles exists to keep automation beneath LinkedIn's detection thresholds and protect the customer's LinkedIn account from restriction. NONE OF THEM GATES AN AGENT DECISION, reviews output quality, or protects the recipient. No approval workflow, no pre send human gate, no role based review and no policy engine was documented on any first party surface. Human involvement occurs in the unified inbox AFTER messages have already been sent. This is the first vendor in the pass whose guardrails are oriented at evading a third party platform rather than at governing the agent. Closely product documentation, help centre and first party blog 2026-07-30	Partial
Security, Identity & GovernanceThe legal documentation is genuinely better than the certification position, which is unusual. STRONG: a full DPA at closelyhq.com/legal/data-processing-agreement with standard contractual clauses governing any transfer out of the EEA, a contractual commitment to BACKGROUND INVESTIGATE every employee or contractor before granting access to client personal data (rare and specific), post termination retention only on an aggregated or de identified basis, a privacy policy honouring GDPR Articles 12 to 23 including erasure with a documented one month response window, and Articles 13 and 14 notice to EEA data subjects plus a published opt out manual. NO CERTIFICATION EXISTS. Closely's own blog states it undergoes audits ALIGNED WITH ISO 27001 STANDARDS, which is not ISO 27001 certification, and is the same hedge family as tofu's inability to state its own attestation status. No SOC 2, no trust centre, no subprocessor list and no penetration test evidence was found. That same first party article names AES-256 at rest and TLS 1.3 in transit in one passage and states the exact protocols are not disclosed in another, a THIRD INSTANCE of the self contradiction finding class after alta and warmly. THE STRUCTURAL ISSUE NO OTHER VENDOR IN THIS PASS RAISES: Closely takes custody of the customer's authenticated LinkedIn session inside its own cloud, so an uncertified vendor holds standing access to an identity the customer cannot easily rotate. Closely DPA, privacy policy, terms of use and first party blog 2026-07-30	Partial
Observability & AuditabilityCampaign level visibility is real and multi account: a unified dashboard reports per sequence performance across every connected LinkedIn account, tracks connection acceptance, reply and step completion, and lets an agency monitor multiple client accounts without logging in and out. Outbound webhooks push activity events into the customer's own systems in real time, so a customer who wants a durable record can build one externally, which is the same inherited pattern noted on tofu and champify. WHAT IS MISSING is anything agent specific: no audit log, no record of what the AI generated versus what a human edited, no action level trail attributable to a user, and no retention policy on activity history. A buyer can see campaign outcomes but cannot reconstruct what the system did on their behalf or why. Closely product documentation, help centre webhooks article and third party reviews 2026-07-30	Partial
Memory & State PersistenceGenuine conversation persistence, no agent memory. A unified or smart inbox consolidates LinkedIn and email threads across every connected account, so conversation history survives across sessions and across the 50 plus LinkedIn accounts an agency might operate, and the agency dashboard preserves per client campaign state without repeated logins. Sequence state (which step a prospect has reached, whether they replied, whether the connection was accepted) persists durably and drives execution. WHAT IS NOT PRESENT is state the agent maintains and reasons over: no cross session agent memory, no learned preference carryover between campaigns, and no retention or forgetting control at the agent level. Message generation reads the prospect profile fresh each time rather than accumulating context. Closely product documentation and third party reviews 2026-07-30	Partial
Deployment & Data ResidencyTHE EXACT INVERSE OF THE TIDIO CASE, and worth reading against it. DEPLOYMENT CONTROL IS ZERO: vendor cloud only, no region selection, no on premises, no private VPC, and specifically no option to keep the LinkedIn session on infrastructure the customer controls. That last point is a real differentiator in this category rather than a theoretical gap, because competing tools do offer local or customer controlled VPS session custody, and Closely's cloud only model is the reason its automation continues when the user's machine is off. JURISDICTION IS UNUSUALLY FAVOURABLE: the operating entity named in the terms of use is Esterson Limited, based in Cyprus, an EU member state, and the DPA governs only transfers OUT of the EEA under standard contractual clauses, which implies EEA default processing. So an EU buyer gets a processor already inside GDPR jurisdiction with no CLOUD Act reach, the opposite of the US incorporated majority of this index. Partial reflects strong jurisdiction and absent control. Closely terms of use, DPA and third party architecture comparisons 2026-07-30	Partial
Prebuilt Agents, Templates & PacksTemplate infrastructure exists at the sequence and message level: reusable campaign sequences combining connection requests, messages, InMails and email steps, message templates that AI personalisation then varies per prospect, and campaign patterns tailored by job title and segment. For agencies there is a white label layer and a multi client dashboard, which is a packaging capability few vendors in this cluster ship. WHAT IS ABSENT is any prebuilt AGENT catalogue: no named agents with distinct jobs comparable to demandbase's five or tofu's three, no marketplace, no importable play library and no community template exchange. Sequence templates are configuration for one automation engine rather than a catalogue of purpose built agents, which is the distinction this axis draws. Closely product documentation and third party reviews 2026-07-30	Partial
Triggers & Channel CoverageDOWNGRADED FROM THE UNSOURCED GRID, which carried Full. Two channels are documented and working: LinkedIn (connection requests, direct messages, InMails, profile visits) and email (integrated finder plus sender for hybrid campaigns). Phone appears in a multichannel claim on Closely's own blog with no supporting product surface and was not credited. Triggers are sequence state transitions (connection accepted, reply received, step elapsed) plus inbound webhook events from LinkedIn Lead Sync forms. THAT IS A NARROW TRIGGER AND CHANNEL SURFACE relative to the Full grades in this cluster: tofu covers six output formats across five channel classes and demandbase reaches advertising, web, email, sales engagement and social. Two channels driven by sequence state is Partial. Closely product documentation and first party blog 2026-07-30	Partial
Model Flexibility & RoutingDOWNGRADED FROM THE UNSOURCED GRID, which carried Partial on no evidence. No model provider is named anywhere across five search passes covering the product pages, help centre, legal pages and first party blog. AI is described only functionally, as writing personalised LinkedIn messages and emails from profile and company data. No model selection, no routing, no bring your own model, no bring your own key and no temperature or style control beyond message templates. SAME SHAPE AS TOFU IN THIS PASS: single provider dependency with the provider undisclosed, which is weaker than gorgias (dependency, provider known) and categorically unlike omilia, pokee-ai or leena-ai, where a 0.0 reflects deliberate vertical integration enabling a certified perimeter. For a product whose entire AI surface is generating outbound messages sent under the customer's own name and LinkedIn identity, an undisclosed model provider is a live procurement question. Closely product documentation, help centre and first party blog 2026-07-30	Unable to verify
APIs, SDKs & MCP ExtensibilityUNUSUALLY WELL EVIDENCED FOR A PARTIAL, because the limitation is stated by the vendor rather than inferred from an absence. Closely's own support response states plainly: no API, but a webhooks integration that pushes information FROM Closely to the customer's system and DOES NOT SUPPORT PUSHING DATA IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, with documentation at help.closelyhq.com. Alongside that sits a Zapier integration reaching thousands of downstream apps. That combination is real but strictly one directional egress: a customer can react to Closely events, and cannot drive Closely programmatically. No SDK, no MCP server, no developer portal and no partner or certification programme exists. THIS IS THE OPPOSITE EVIDENCE POSITION TO MOST Ext GRADES IN THIS PASS, where a Partial usually means the developer surface was not reached; here the vendor confirms there is nothing to reach. CAVEAT: the vendor statement dates from May 2025, so an API shipped since would move this to Full. Closely support response, help centre webhooks article and Zapier listing 2026-07-30	Partial
Testing, Debugging & OptimizationThe same shape as optimizely, demandbase and every other Partial on this axis in the pass, and the weakest instance of it. Closely ships detailed campaign performance analytics: reply rates, connection acceptance rates and step level completion per sequence, across multiple accounts, which lets a customer compare one sequence against another empirically. THAT MEASURES THE OUTCOME OF THE AGENT'S WORK, NOT THE AGENT. No sandbox or dry run mode, no evaluation harness, no formal A/B or variant testing framework, no output scoring, no regression suite and no way to test a message generation change before it reaches real prospects were documented. For a product that sends under the customer's own LinkedIn identity, the absence of a dry run surface is the more consequential gap. The counter example remains pydantic-ai's Pydantic Evals, a shipped customer facing evaluation product. Closely product documentation and third party reviews 2026-07-30	Partial
Browser & Computer UseUPGRADED FROM THE UNSOURCED GRID, which carried None, and this is the FIRST NON ZERO Comp GRADE IN THE GTM CLUSTER OF THIS PASS. It is a deliberate call that needs review. Closely operates the customer's authenticated LinkedIn session from its own cloud with no Chrome extension and no local machine dependency, performing profile visits, connection requests, direct messages and InMails by driving LinkedIn as that user, and routes the traffic through residential proxies to present a plausible IP. LinkedIn exposes no public API for these actions at this scale, so the product necessarily operates the interface rather than calling it. THAT IS UNATTENDED OPERATION OF THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE ON THE USER'S BEHALF, which is what this axis exists to measure, and it is categorically more than the API only architecture that earned None for every other GTM vendor here. PARTIAL NOT FULL because it is purpose built single site automation rather than general browser or computer control, and because THE EXACT MECHANISM IS NOT DOCUMENTED: headless browser versus emulated client was not established on any first party surface. FLAGGED AS A TAXONOMY PRECEDENT QUESTION. Third party architecture comparisons and Closely product documentation 2026-07-30	Partial

The Agentic Index coverage score grades every vendor Full, Partial or Unable to verify against the same 14 buyer facing capabilities, from public evidence only. Each capability links to how all vendors in the index score on it. How this evidence is graded

Pricing

Starter $49/mo ($29 annual) · Growth $127 · Essential $205 · Custom from $350 · Agency $999 (unlimited) · ~40% off annual

hybrid

Trial available

Included quota

Starter ($49): 1 LinkedIn account, 1,000 credits/mo (~250 emails / 50 phones / 500 AI personalizations). Growth ($127): 3 accounts, 3,000 credits. Essential ($205): 5 accounts, 5,000 credits. All tiers include AI sales agents + advanced analytics (Starter must buy credits separately to unlock AI personalization).

What is public

Closely (closelyhq.com - LinkedIn + email outbound automation with AI sales agents: lead research, ICP qualification, personalized messaging) publishes self-serve pricing by # of LinkedIn accounts ('senders') + monthly credits. Starter $49/mo ($29 annual): 1 LinkedIn account, unlimited email accounts, 1,000 credits/mo, whitelabel. Growth $127/mo ($87 annual): 3 accounts, 3,000 credits/mo. Essential $205/mo ($145 annual): 5 accounts, 5,000 credits/mo. Custom from ~$350/mo: 10+ accounts, tailored credits. A flat white-label Agency plan runs $999/mo (unlimited accounts/seats/credits). Annual saves ~40%; 14-day free trial.

Billing mechanics

Self-serve subscription tiers by LinkedIn-account count + a flexible monthly credit pool; credits spend on email searches (4 credits), phone lookups (20 credits), or AI personalizations (2 credits each). Unlimited email accounts on all tiers. Annual billing ~40% cheaper than monthly.

Cost watchouts

Starter requires buying credits separately to unlock AI personalization; phone lookups are credit-expensive (20 each); LinkedIn-automation account-flag risk is inherent to the category.

Variable cost rationale

Cost scales with LinkedIn-account count (tier) + credit consumption (searches/lookups/personalizations).

Additional watchouts

Self-serve and transparent, but LinkedIn automation carries account-flag risk; credit math (especially phone lookups) can deplete the pool quickly.

Overage / add-ons

Credits are the metering unit; run low and you allocate/top up credits (email 4 / phone 20 / AI personalization 2 each). Credits don't roll over on base plans.

Sales call required

Mixed (some tiers require a call)

Commercial notes

SMB/agency outbound-automation tool; not affiliated with LinkedIn; competes with Expandi, Dripify, HeyReach, lemlist, La Growth Machine

Key ambiguities

Credit consumption varies by action mix (email vs phone vs AI personalization); effective cost depends on how you allocate the monthly pool. Trial duration cited as 14-day (some sources say 7-day).

Cancellation / refund

14-day free trial (no credit card); monthly or annual self-serve (annual ~40% off).

Support SLA / resale

Self-serve SaaS; whitelabel (domain/logo/colors) from Starter; LinkedIn + email multichannel; AI agents for research/qualification/messaging; CRM sync (HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, GoHighLevel)

Missing data

Custom tier figures aren't published (10+ accounts, tailored credits; starts ~$350/mo). A flat white-label Agency plan runs $999/mo for unlimited accounts/seats/credits. Credits are shared across email (4), phone (20), and AI personalization (2 each) and don't roll over on base plans, so effective cost depends on your action mix.

Agentic Index verified 2026-06-25

Official pricing page

Related vendors

Alternatives to Closely

The closest documented capability profiles to Closely among GTM and revenue agents tracked by Agentic Index, ordered by similarity on the same 14 point evidence the rankings use. No vendor pays for placement.

Jeeva6.0 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Triggers & Channel Coverage
Sympera AI7.0 / 14Adds documented Model Flexibility & Routing
Dialog7.5 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Integrations & Tool Calling and Knowledge Grounding & RAG
Lawmatics4.5 / 14A lighter documented profile than Closely
Laxis5.5 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Knowledge Grounding & RAG
Nooks5.5 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Triggers & Channel Coverage

Similarity is computed from each vendor's Agentic Index coverage score evidence, axis by axis, not from the totals. How this evidence is graded

Compare Closely with other vendors →Compare all GTM and revenue agents →See where Closely ranks →

Data confidence: high

Head to head

Closely vs Kakiyo