Chatwoot vs Crisp: which one should you use?
Last updated July 7, 2026
Chatwoot and Crisp both sell a genuine multichannel inbox, email, WhatsApp, SMS, and chat, unified in one place, but they get there from opposite starting points. Chatwoot is open-source and self-hostable, trading a license fee for infrastructure you run yourself, with a hosted Cloud option if you’d rather not. Crisp is hosted-only from day one, priced per seat, with no self-hosting path at all.
If you’re weighing them, the real question is whether data ownership and open-source auditability matter enough to take on server maintenance, or whether you’d rather pay a seat-based fee and never think about infrastructure.
Pricing
Self-hosted Chatwoot has no license fee; Cloud starts at $19/agent/mo and climbs to $99/agent/mo on Enterprise. Crisp’s free plan caps at 2 seats with no conversation limit; paid tiers start at $45/mo for 4 seats and reach $295/mo for 20.
Feature comparison
Both platforms cover similar ground: multichannel inboxes, Telegram, AI assistance, and workflows. The real differentiator is ownership and hosting, not feature count.
What each one does well
Chatwoot’s edge is control: full data ownership and an auditable open-source codebase if you self-host. Crisp’s edge is speed: a polished, hosted inbox you can be using within minutes, no server involved.
Verdict
If ownership or a genuinely free unlimited-agent tier matters, Chatwoot self-hosted is the stronger case, provided you can maintain it. If you want that same multichannel breadth without any infrastructure, Crisp gets there faster, at the cost of seat-based pricing from day one.
Also see our full breakdowns: Chatwoot alternative, Crisp alternative, Chatwoot pricing, Crisp pricing.
Pricing at a glance
Feature comparison
| Feature | Chatwoot | Crisp |
|---|---|---|
| Self-hosting option | ||
| Open-source / auditable | ||
| Multichannel inbox (email, SMS, WhatsApp) | ||
| Telegram integration | ||
| No server to maintain (hosted option) | ||
| AI-assisted replies | ||
| Flat pricing, not per-agent | ||
| Free tier with unlimited agents | ||
| Automated workflows | ||
| Setup under 5 minutes |
What people like about Chatwoot
- Fully open-source, self-hostable with no license fee
- Full data ownership when self-hosted
- Unlimited agents on the self-hosted tier
- Genuine multichannel inbox: email, WhatsApp, Instagram, SMS, Telegram
Common complaints about Chatwoot
- Self-hosting requires setting up and maintaining Docker, Postgres, and Redis
- Cloud pricing is per-agent and climbs quickly at Business/Enterprise
- No vendor support on self-hosted deployments
- Setup, hosted or self-hosted, is not a five-minute task
What people like about Crisp
- No infrastructure to run, hosted from the start
- Free plan has no conversation cap, just a 2-seat limit
- Polished, unified inbox with workflows and AI on paid tiers
- Faster to set up than a self-hosted platform
Common complaints about Crisp
- No self-hosting or open-source option
- Free plan caps at 2 seats with no workflows or AI
- Seat pricing jumps in large steps: $45 to $95 to $295/mo
- No path to full data ownership the way self-hosted Chatwoot offers
Chatwoot or Crisp?
Choose Chatwoot if data ownership matters and you have the ops capacity to self-host, or if you want a hosted multichannel inbox and don't mind per-agent Cloud pricing. Choose Crisp if you want a polished, hosted omnichannel inbox without ever touching a server, and 2 free seats is enough to start. Neither is built for a team that only wants a chat widget without seat multipliers or infrastructure.
Or consider a third option
Chatwoot asks for either your ops time or a per-agent Cloud bill; Crisp asks for a seat-based bill from the start. Both are full support platforms built for multichannel teams. If chat routed to Telegram is genuinely all you need, Bubblegram skips both tradeoffs: no server, no per-agent fee, no seat limit, $10/mo flat for up to 10 sites.
Common questions
Which one is actually free?
Self-hosted Chatwoot has no license fee, but you pay in server costs and setup/maintenance time. Crisp's free plan is genuinely free but caps at 2 seats with no workflows or AI.
Which is easier to set up?
Crisp, by a wide margin. It's hosted from the start, sign up and add the widget. Chatwoot either means running Docker, Postgres, and Redis yourself, or paying for Cloud.
Which gives me more control over my data?
Self-hosted Chatwoot. Nothing leaves your own infrastructure, and the codebase is open-source and auditable. Crisp is a closed, hosted platform.
Do both support Telegram?
Yes, both can pull Telegram messages into a shared inbox. In both cases you reply from the platform's own dashboard, not from Telegram itself.
Which is cheaper for a 5-person team?
Self-hosted Chatwoot is cheapest if your time is free. Otherwise, Chatwoot Cloud Startups at $19/agent/mo ($95/mo for 5) undercuts Crisp Essentials at $95/mo flat for up to 10 seats, roughly a wash depending on team size.
Reply from Telegram.
Skip the dashboard.
Most support tools are overkill. Bubblegram routes messages to Telegram and gets out of the way.
Start for free