In our comparison of Keap vs. SugarCRM, SugarCRM is the best option with a higher overall Wheelhouse Score. Wheelhouse Score uses a combination of feature and pricing comparison data, average user ratings, and editorial reviews to score software vendors on a scale of 1-10.
Simple and spontaneous in use. Learning and navigation are super easy. Offering a number of tools to search, organize and evaluate the information in just a wink of an eye. It can automate purchasing, emails campaigns and tracking of clients. It saves us a lot of time and energy.
Limited sorting and organizing of clients' information.
General Comments: The big companies will find it very beneficial.
Listing all my employees on my business page is easy with it.
Email viewing is not attractive.
Overall, love the software. Can't imagine working without it.
I feel very lucky to have Infusionsoft as my partner. Their amazing support is always ready to help. It is like a one-stop-shop for everything you need, CRM, marketing and e-commerce. The email campaigns are great. Out of all the automation tools I've used, Infusionsoft is the best.
It has a steep learning curve. The interface seems clunky. Hope to get these corrected in the next update.
I have worked with Sugar CRM and created numerous add-ons for consulting projects.
Flexible, a nice development model if you personally want to host the CRM, almost all can be extended in PHP, the cost is lower compared to Salesforce.
A dated UI, tabs are poorly displayed.
Simple and spontaneous in use. Learning and navigation are super easy. Offering a number of tools to search, organize and evaluate the information in just a wink of an eye. It can automate purchasing, emails campaigns and tracking of clients. It saves us a lot of time and energy.
Limited sorting and organizing of clients' information.
Overall, love the software. Can't imagine working without it.
I feel very lucky to have Infusionsoft as my partner. Their amazing support is always ready to help. It is like a one-stop-shop for everything you need, CRM, marketing and e-commerce. The email campaigns are great. Out of all the automation tools I've used, Infusionsoft is the best.
It has a steep learning curve. The interface seems clunky. Hope to get these corrected in the next update.
General Comments: The big companies will find it very beneficial.
Listing all my employees on my business page is easy with it.
Email viewing is not attractive.
I have worked with Sugar CRM and created numerous add-ons for consulting projects.
Flexible, a nice development model if you personally want to host the CRM, almost all can be extended in PHP, the cost is lower compared to Salesforce.
A dated UI, tabs are poorly displayed.
Add suggested to comparison
In our rating and review comparison of Keap vs. SugarCRM, Keap has 58 user reviews and SugarCRM has 39. The average star rating for Keap is 4.29 while SugarCRM has an average rating of 4.07. Keap has more positive reviews than SugarCRM. Comparing Keap vs. SugarCRM reviews, Keap has stronger overall reviews.
Keap vs. SugarCRM both offer a strong set of features and functionality including Customer Management, Lead Management, Campaign Management, Reporting & Analytics, Drag-and-Drop Builders/Designers, Workflow Automation, Supported Channels, Campaign Types, Accounting Features, Customizable Items, Reminders/Alerts, Systems/Administrative, Integration Options, Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, Help Desk Features, Limits, Supported Technologies. In our feature comparison of Keap vs. SugarCRM, SugarCRM offers more of the most popular features and tools than Keap.
In our pricing comparison of Keap vs. SugarCRM, SugarCRM's pricing starts at $49/month and is more affordable compared to Keap's starting cost of $129/month.
Our comparison of Keap vs. SugarCRM shows that SugarCRM scores higher in usability for setup & support. Keap scores higher in ease of use, meets requirements, learning curve, quality of support, ease of admin, but SugarCRM has the best scores overall for system usability.
Get your personalized recommendations now.
