CRM
Capsule CRM
UK / wider Europe Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Zestia Ltd · capsulecrm.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Capsule CRM, from Zestia Ltd registered in England with No 06418281, scores highest on integrations, contact & data model and pricing transparency: a '100+ integrations' directory with early access to Capsule MCP, custom fields capped at 5 on the free plan, public contact limits of 250/30,000/60,000/120,000, a free 14-day trial with no card required, and annual savings of up to 26% — but no per-seat price for Starter, Growth or Advanced appears, leaving the invoice not computable from public pages. It scores lowest on automation, with the evidence silent on triggers, sequences and routing, and on import, export & exit, where import from another CRM or a spreadsheet is evidenced but export appears nowhere. Sovereignty scores 2-3, the evidence recording 'no sovereignty attributes on record' — no DPA, subprocessor list or hosting region. The widest spread is pricing transparency 3-5, where the data protection officer credits genuinely public limits and the solo seller caps it for an uncomputable invoice; flagged splits were none above threshold.
Speaks for it
- 'Connect to 100+ integrations' with early access to Capsule MCP
- Public tier limits — 250/30,000/60,000/120,000 contacts, 1 to 50 sales pipelines, 5 custom fields on the free plan
- A free plan plus a 14-day trial with no card required
- Annual billing saves up to 26% versus monthly, as stated on the pricing page
- Self-serve import of contact data from another CRM or a spreadsheet
Held against it
- No evidenced automation — no trigger, sequence or routing rule appears in the evidence
- Export is entirely unevidenced — no format, object coverage, history or exit terms
- No per-seat price for Starter, Growth or Advanced, so the invoice is not computable from public pages
- The evidence records 'no sovereignty attributes on record' — no DPA, subprocessor list or hosting region
- No evidenced stage requirements, probabilities, forecasting or quota tracking
Best for
- You want a basic contacts-and-pipelines tracker with publicly stated tier limits and custom fields (5 even on the free plan)
- Your existing tools are covered by the '100+ integrations' directory
- You want to try before paying — a 14-day trial with no card required plus a free plan with 250 contacts
- You are importing contact data in from another CRM or a spreadsheet
Avoid if
- You need workflow automation — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You must plan a data exit — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your finance department needs forecasting or quota tracking — the evidence evidences no stage requirements, probabilities or forecast views
- You must review subprocessors, DPA or hosting region before signing — the evidence records 'no sovereignty attributes on record'
The scores
Contact & data model
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Depth and hygiene of the core records — contacts, companies, deals, custom fields, deduplication.
0 — A flat address book; no relations between people, companies and deals.
3 — The standard three objects exist but customization is cosmetic: few field types, no required fields, duplicates accumulate unchecked.
5 — Custom fields across objects, basic dedupe on create, activity history on the record; complex models still need workarounds.
8 — Rich field types with validation, merge and dedupe tooling, relationships beyond the standard model, permissioned field access.
10 — A genuinely modelable system: custom objects or equivalent, bulk hygiene tooling, field-level history — the data model bends to the business, not the reverse.
The Solo Seller
Custom fields exist (5 even on the free plan) so it clears the cosmetic tier, but the evidence is silent on dedupe, merge, required fields and field types — 'your client's dog's birthday' is marketing, not data hygiene. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Custom fields exist but are metered as a count (5 on free) and the record shows nothing on field validation, dedupe, merge, or permissions — the customization is cosmetic per the anchor at 3. Contacts, sales and supplier details are tracked, but hygiene tooling is unevidenced, and unevidenced is unscored. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
A standard contact model exists with tier-capped custom fields (5 on free) and conversation tracking, but the evidence evidences no dedupe, merge tooling, required fields or field validation — anchor-3 territory where customization exists and enforcement doesn't. For a 40-seat team, hygiene I can't verify doesn't count. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
Contacts, conversations and supplier details are tracked and custom fields exist (five on the free plan), so it clears the flat-address-book floor. But the evidence is silent on dedupe, merge, required fields and any relationship model beyond the standard objects — a tier promising 120,000 contacts with zero evidenced hygiene tooling is a data-quality incident waiting to happen. 1 2
The Migrator
Custom fields (tier-capped at 5 on free) plus separate pipelines and project boards lift it above a flat address book, but the registry is silent on dedupe, merge, field validation and permissions — and unchecked duplicates are the bill you pay at import time. 1 2
The Skeptic
Custom fields exist but the only hard number is a free-plan cap of 5, and the rest is birthday-dog marketing copy. No evidence of dedupe, merge, validation, required fields, or anything beyond contacts-and-pipelines — silence on hygiene is silence, so rubric level 3 is where it lands. 1 2
Pipeline & forecasting
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the pipeline enforces a process and produces reporting a finance department accepts.
0 — A kanban of deals with amounts; nothing is enforced, nothing rolls up.
3 — Multiple pipelines and stage probabilities exist, but no required fields per stage and only canned reports.
5 — Stage requirements, win/loss capture and standard forecast views; custom reporting is limited or an add-on.
8 — Enforceable process (required fields, stage gates, routing), custom report builder, forecast by team and period with quota tracking.
10 — Forecasting a CFO signs: weighted and commit-based views, historical snapshots, attainment tracking, and reporting composable enough to answer questions the vendor never anticipated.
The Solo Seller
Multiple pipelines are confirmed (1 free, up to 50 on Advanced) and sales tracking exists, but nothing evidences stage gates, win/loss capture or any forecast view. That's a kanban with structure, not a process a finance function would sign. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Multiple pipelines exist, capped numerically by tier (1 free up to 50), with sales-tracking claims — but no evidence of stage requirements, probabilities, forecasting or a report builder. That sits between the kanban-with-amounts floor and rubric level 3. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
Multiple pipelines are real and priced (1 on free, up to 50 on Advanced), but the only pipeline reporting evidenced is a canned 'see which deals need love' dashboard — no required fields per stage, no quota tracking, no forecast views, no snapshots. A CFO signs nothing on this evidence. 1 2
The RevOps Integrator
Multiple sales pipelines exist and are tier-capped (1 on free, 50 on Advanced), and 'see what you've sold and where your business is headed' is reporting language — but nothing evidences stage requirements, win/loss capture, quota tracking or any forecast a finance department would accept. 1 2
The Migrator
Up to 50 pipelines on the top tier and a 'sales tracking' dashboard are all the evidence offers; no stage requirements, probabilities, forecast views or quota tracking are evidenced — nothing a finance department would sign. 1 2
The Skeptic
Multiple pipelines are confirmed only as tier limits (1 on free, 50 on Advanced), plus a homepage promise that you'll see 'where your business is headed' — which is forecasting copy, not forecast capability. No stage gates, no required fields, no report builder, no quota tracking anywhere in the registry, so I can't move past 3. 1 2
Automation & workflows
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Triggers, sequences and routing that remove manual work without a consultant.
0 — No automation beyond email templates.
3 — Simple if-this-then-that on records; no multi-step sequences, no branching.
5 — Multi-step workflows with delays and branching, email sequences, basic lead routing — capped by tier or count.
8 — Full workflow builder across objects with webhooks as steps, round-robin routing, sequence analytics.
10 — Automation as infrastructure: versioned workflows, error handling, per-step logs, and limits generous enough that the feature is not its own upsell.
The Solo Seller
No trigger, sequence or routing rule is evidenced anywhere; the closest facts are 'thoughtful AI' and early-access MCP, which are vibes, not workflows. For a seller buying a CRM to kill manual follow-up, the silence is decisive. 2
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing page itemizes limits in detail — contacts, pipelines, boards, custom fields — and no workflow, sequence or trigger count appears anywhere; the only automation-adjacent claim is a vague AI feature note. By the anchors, no automation beyond email templates means 0. 1 2
The Sales Ops Lead
The evidence is completely silent on triggers, sequences, routing and workflows — not one automation fact — and a vague 'thoughtful about how AI is implemented' line is marketing, not capability. By the anchors, absence of any evidenced automation scores at the bottom. 2
The RevOps Integrator
The evidence is entirely silent on triggers, sequences, branching and routing; the only automation-adjacent evidence is a separately priced Marketing add-on 'starting from £7/month' and vague AI copy about an easier working day. A paid marketing upsell is not workflow automation, and absence here is the information. 1 2
The Migrator
Not one trigger, sequence or routing rule appears in the registry; the nearest fact is a vague 'we've been thoughtful about how AI is implemented' blurb, and AI copy is not workflow automation. 2
The Skeptic
The evidence is entirely silent on triggers, sequences, workflows and routing — a CRM homepage that had real automation would say so, and this one doesn't. The only adjacent artefact is a vague 'AI is implemented thoughtfully' flag, which is not automation evidence; it barely keeps this off the floor. 2
Integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Two-way email/calendar sync, native connections, and an API that treats external systems as first-class.
0 — No API, no sync; data enters by CSV and leaves never.
3 — One-way email logging (BCC), a handful of Zapier triggers, a read-mostly API.
5 — Two-way email and calendar sync for the major providers, a documented REST API with sane limits, a modest native directory.
8 — Deep native integrations for the revenue stack, webhooks, OAuth apps, API parity with the UI for core objects.
10 — An ecosystem: public API covering everything the UI does, event streams, a marketplace, and sync so reliable the CRM can be the system of record without being the only system.
The Solo Seller
'100+ integrations' is a real native directory, and early-access MCP hints at first-class access coming — but no documented API, no webhooks, and no email/calendar sync evidence, so it can't reach the anchor where the API is public and sane. 2
The Data Protection Officer
100+ integrations and MCP early access give a real native directory, but there is no documented API, no webhooks, no OAuth apps and no two-way email/calendar sync in the record. A directory without an evidenced API is rubric level 3 territory; I stretch to 4 for the breadth. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
'Connect to 100+ integrations' and early access to Capsule MCP evidence a real native directory, but there is no evidence of two-way email/calendar sync, a documented REST API, or webhooks. Between rubric level 3 and 5: a directory without proven sync or API depth. 2
The RevOps Integrator
'Connect to 100+ integrations' is a number with no direction attached — no documented REST API, no webhooks, and critically no evidence of two-way email or calendar sync, which is exactly the one-way-import-in-disguise pattern I reject. Early access to Capsule MCP signals API intent, but a beta tease is not a public API an integrator can build against. 2
The Migrator
'Connect to 100+ integrations' and early-access MCP suggest a real directory and an API surface, but nothing evidences two-way email/calendar sync, documented API limits or webhooks — a count is not a contract. 2
The Skeptic
'Connect to 100+ integrations' is a directory claim I can't audit, and an early-access MCP hints at API ambition. But there is no documented API, no email/calendar sync, no webhooks in the registry — a count is not a capability, so it sits between 'handful of triggers' and 'sane REST API'. 2
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where other people's personal data actually lives and under whose law — entity, hosting, subprocessors, DPA.
0 — US entity, US-default hosting, no public DPA or subprocessor list.
3 — A DPA exists and an EU region is available on request or on top tiers; subprocessor exposure to US CLOUD Act reach is broad and undocumented.
5 — EU hosting selectable at signup, published DPA and subprocessor list; core processing still touches US entities.
8 — EU entity or EU-default hosting with published subprocessors, consent-friendly fields, retention and deletion controls; residual US exposure named and narrow.
10 — European entity, EU-only processing including subprocessors, deletion that provably deletes — sovereignty a DPO can sign off without a caveat file.
The Solo Seller
Zestia Ltd registered in England is a genuinely European entity, which lifts it off the floor, but there is no DPA, subprocessor list or hosting location on record. I can't award credit for controls the evidence cannot show. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Zestia Ltd is registered in England, which avoids US-default hosting at the entity level — the only point in its favour. The evidence records no DPA, no subprocessor list, no hosting region, no consent fields and no retention or deletion controls; an English entity is not an EU entity, and I cannot process other people's personal data on undocumented subprocessors. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Zestia Ltd registered in England (No 06418281) at least clears the US-entity bar of rubric level 0, but the evidence records 'no sovereignty attributes on record' — hosting location, DPA and subprocessor list are all unevidenced. Unnameable residual exposure is not something a DPO signs. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Zestia Ltd is registered in England with prices in GBP, which keeps it off the US-entity floor, but the evidence records no sovereignty attributes at all — no DPA, no subprocessor list, no hosting location, no retention or deletion controls. Undocumented subprocessor exposure is precisely what a DPO cannot sign off. 1
The Migrator
Zestia Ltd is registered in England, so no US-default entity, but 'no sovereignty attributes on record' means no DPA, subprocessor list or hosting location is evidenced — undocumented subprocessor exposure is exactly what a DPO cannot sign. 1
The Skeptic
Zestia Ltd, registered in England with number 06418281, is at least a real European entity — but 'no sovereignty attributes on record' means no DPA, no subprocessor list, no hosting region, no retention or deletion controls. A UK headquarters proves nothing about where personal data is processed, and the evidence gives me no way to check. 1
Import, export & exit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting in with history intact, and out with everything — the anti-lock-in criterion.
0 — Import is a support ticket; export is contacts-only CSV missing notes, activities and files.
3 — Self-serve CSV import with mapping; export covers main objects but drops activity history, attachments or relations.
5 — Guided migration from major competitors, full-object CSV export, API access sufficient to rebuild the database elsewhere with effort.
8 — Complete export (all objects, history, files) self-serve in open formats, import with dedupe and dry-run, no API metering that prices exit out of reach.
10 — Exit as a feature: documented full-fidelity export, migration tooling both directions, and contractual data-return terms — leaving is a weekend, which is exactly why you can stay.
The Solo Seller
Self-serve import from another CRM or a spreadsheet is confirmed, which beats a support ticket — but export is entirely unevidenced: no format, no objects, no history. I never enter a system I can't prove I can leave, so this stays near the bottom. 2
The Data Protection Officer
Self-serve import from another CRM or a spreadsheet is claimed, but export appears nowhere in the record — no format, no object coverage, no history or attachments, no exit terms. Import above a support ticket lifts it off 0, but an exit path with zero evidence keeps it below rubric level 3. 2
The Sales Ops Lead
Import from another CRM or a spreadsheet is evidenced, which beats a support ticket, but export appears nowhere in the evidence — no full-object export, no history, no exit terms. Between rubric level 0 and 3: half the criterion is simply absent. 2
The RevOps Integrator
Import 'from another CRM (or that pesky spreadsheet)' is evidenced self-serve ingress, but only for contact data — no evidence deals, notes, files or history come along. Export is completely absent from the evidence: a vendor that documents getting in but never getting out is lock-in by omission. 2
The Migrator
The only exit-adjacent fact is 'import your contact data from another CRM (or that pesky spreadsheet)' with no mapping or dedupe detail, and there is not one word about export, API extraction or contractual data return — an unevidenced export path is how a two-week move becomes a two-quarter project. 2
The Skeptic
One marketing sentence says you can import contact data from another CRM or a spreadsheet — contacts, note, not the rest of the database. Export, API access and exit terms are completely absent from the registry, and a vendor who doesn't publicise the door out usually hasn't built one. 2
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real invoice — per seat, per month, at renewal — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — An entry price exists, but the tiers most buyers need are unpriced, or per-seat maths is obscured by bundles, minimums or mandatory onboarding fees.
5 — Most tiers carry real numbers with billing period and VAT treatment stated, but at least one commonly needed capability hides in an unpriced tier or usage-metered add-on.
8 — Every tier priced publicly including annual/monthly split; limits, seat minimums and overage rules stated; only genuine enterprise contracts are custom.
10 — Complete price computability: every tier, add-on, usage meter and renewal rule public, with a calculator or table that makes the invoice at 3 and 30 seats a two-minute exercise.
The Solo Seller
The page publishes tier limits, contact caps, the annual/monthly split and an add-on 'from £7/mo' — credit for stating limits — but not a single per-seat price for Starter, Growth or Advanced, nor VAT treatment. On my own card, an invoice I cannot compute from public pages is a 3 at best. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Limits are genuinely public — contacts, pipelines, boards, custom fields per tier, annual/monthly split with 26% discount, a free plan, a 14-day no-card trial, and a priced marketing add-on from £7/month. But per-seat prices and VAT treatment are absent from the record, and 'Contact Sales' hints at unpriced conversations, so the real invoice is not computable from evidence alone. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Tier limits are unusually public — contacts 250/30k/60k/120k, pipelines and boards per tier, 26% annual discount, £7/month add-on — but not one per-seat price appears in the evidence, so I cannot compute the real invoice at 40 seats. The add-on is 'starting from' pricing, which is a meter I can't budget. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Limits are unusually public — contacts, pipelines, custom fields and project boards per tier, a 14-day no-card trial, annual/monthly split with the 26% discount stated. But no per-seat price for any core CRM tier appears in the evidence, VAT treatment is unstated, and the Marketing add-on hides behind 'starting from' — I still can't compute the invoice. 1
The Migrator
Tier limits, the annual/monthly split ('Save up to 26%'), a no-card 14-day trial and a 'from £7' add-on are public, but no per-seat price, VAT treatment or full add-on cost appears in the registry, so the invoice at 3 or 30 seats is not computable. 1 2
The Skeptic
The tier skeleton is public — contact quotas (250/30k/60k/120k), pipeline counts, a 14-day no-card trial, and an add-on 'starting from £7/month' — but there is not a single captured per-seat price for Starter, Growth or Advanced. The 'Save up to 26%' is classic weasel wording, and 'starting from' on the add-on hides the real meter, so no buyer can compute a 30-seat renewal from this page. 1
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in GB | 1/3 pts | 3 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 5 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 15 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. The page does not state which AWS region hosts the data, and no other customer-data subprocessors (e.g. email or payment) are named in the excerpts.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 13 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 7 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 7 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 data facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 hosting facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 compliance fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 support fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (15)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor pricing page capsulecrm.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Vendor homepage capsulecrm.com Checked 16 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Terms of service capsulecrm.com Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy capsulecrm.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Security / trust page capsulecrm.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Contact & data model — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Contact & data model — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Integrations & API — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Integrations & API — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Import, export & exit — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Import, export & exit — found from sitemap capsulecrm.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →