Gong vs Modjo

Gong

Gong's documented answer to sales content is a directory of connectors to dedicated content platforms — Highspot, Seismic, Showpad among fifteen listed — rather than anything of its own; we found no public information on a native library, search, versioning, approvals or templates. The asset-management page we captured concerns financial asset managers growing assets under management, not sales material.

Modjo

The library is a centralized, secure, categorized collection of recorded sales calls and key-moment snippets — folders, topics, sales stages, descriptions, team-wide access — explicitly used to onboard new reps and replace call shadowing. It is a coaching-content library rather than document management: we found no public information on versioning, expiry, approval workflows, brand templates, language tagging, per-asset usage reporting, or search within the library.

Gong

Tracked links are documented with unusual candour toward the seller — invisible pixel, redirect URLs, opens deduplicated, and the vendor states it cannot determine who opened an email or clicked a link — and shared microsites arrive only through third-party tools such as Aligned, Dock and Trumpet. We found no public information addressed to the people tracked: no notice or consent step for recipients, no way to switch tracking off per link or room, and no retention period for visitor data, even though forwarded emails keep triggering counted opens for people who never agreed to anything.

Modjo

The captured pages describe a conversation-intelligence product whose surfaces are the CRM and the inbox; we found no public information on digital sales rooms, mutual action plans, proposals or trackable content links. The one buyer-facing tracking control that is documented concerns call recording: external meeting participants are shown a consent page before the meeting starts, and a decline stops the recording automatically with the host notified.

Gong

A Gong Academy course on recording and consent options — described as covering how each option works, and required before live training — sits beside scorecard-based call coaching with permission-gated visibility and CSV export of results. But the pages show that consent options exist without showing what those options are, and the privacy policy retains personal data only "as long as we deem it as reasonably necessary", with no retention period stated for recordings that a works council could measure against.

Modjo

Consent before recording is documented and defensible: a consent page before video meetings, automatic stop when anyone declines (including late joiners), logged and audit-traceable consent decisions with export available, a visible recorder with a sound signal, a client duty to inform employees and their correspondents, and retention periods the client can set. Onboarding and coaching rest on the call library, call reviews with comments, and AI-flagged coaching opportunities. We found no public information on role-play, courses or certifications, or explicit German transcription support, and consent works only with Google Meet or Microsoft Teams, one provider at a time, requiring a licensed Modjo host.

Gong

Automatic call scoring is an admin switch that can be turned off at any time, scorecard answers are grounded in transcript snippets the scorer can inspect, and access to scores is governed by permission profiles — that much is genuinely documented. What is missing from the measured seller's side: the host of every call is reviewed by default, calls from the past ninety days can be scored retroactively once a scorecard is published, and we found no public information on the AI model provider, on whether customer data is excluded from model training, or on documentation aimed at works council agreements — and a system that automatically rates employees is a co-determination matter under BetrVG § 87 (1) 6.

Modjo

AI Call Scoring is documented with its GDPR purpose, the score is stated to belong to the call rather than the employee, visibility is restrictable to participants and managers, retention is client-configurable, and the AI subcontractors — Microsoft, OpenAI, Google — are named. But the data processing agreement states that artificial intelligence features are an integral part of the product and cannot be deactivated, and we found no public information on team-level aggregation settings, exclusion of customer data from model training, or publicly defined scoring metrics. A works council would be asked to accept an AI layer it cannot switch off.

Gong

Salesforce, HubSpot and Microsoft Dynamics are each supported natively in both directions — CRM data imported for context, calls, emails and activities written back as objects, CRM fields editable in Gong and synced back — plus an Outlook add-in, a Chrome extension and a broad integration directory. We found no public information on single sign-on or provisioning beyond a category name, only one CRM can be connected at a time, and exit is a thirty-day export window that includes recorded calls, after which all customer data is deleted.

Modjo

Salesforce and HubSpot integrations are documented with automatic summaries and field updates written back to any object or field, Modjo is embedded in both CRMs plus phone, video, email and calendar connectors, and SCIM 2.0 provisioning is documented across major identity providers, with APIs, webhooks and MCP defined as interfaces. On exit the client has thirty days to request its recordings back in raw file format before destruction, with backups kept a further thirty days. We found no public information on bulk export of the content library or analytics, e-signature or CPQ integrations, or deletion propagating to connected systems.

Gong

A data processing agreement exists and expressly prevails over the terms on data protection, an EU and UK privacy representative is appointed, and the German homepage advertises a "Datenzentrum in der EU" — while the contracting entities are the Israeli parent and its US subsidiary, the privacy policy places processing in the United States, Europe, Israel "and other locations", and we found no published subprocessor list and no names for the transcription or AI providers that recordings and documents are passed to. California law and San Francisco venue govern the contract, so for German calls the chain is not visible to the buyer on these pages.

Modjo

A French contracting entity hosts on named infrastructure — Amazon Web Services in France — under a data processing agreement that covers call recordings and commits to the EU AI Act, with a published subprocessor page and named AI providers including Microsoft, OpenAI, Google and Deepl. It stops short of the top level because per-subprocessor locations are not individually documented, and the named providers are US-headquartered companies subject to the US CLOUD Act regardless of server region, as the captured caveat itself states. We found no public information on the vendor's ownership.

Gong

The pricing page publishes the shape of the bill — "Licenses are priced per user", "a platform fee based on the number of users supported", four team-size bands and the promise to "integrate your existing tech stack for free" — but not one monetary figure for any plan, with the terms putting every fee on the order form under subscription-based, usage-based or other models. A buyer cannot compute an annual cost from public pages, and should note fees are noncancelable and non-refundable, with one-year auto-renewal unless notice is given at least 60 days before term end.

Modjo

Site navigation shows a Pricing page, but the captured pages contain no per-seat price, tier structure, seat types, module or add-on prices, platform fees, seat minimums or minimum term. An annual cost cannot be computed from public information alone.