CRM
NetHunt CRM
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by NetHunt · www.nethunt.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
NetHunt CRM is pitched as living inside Gmail. Integrations score highest, at 5 and 6: ten named integrations — Gmail, Google Workspace, Apollo, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Slack, Zapier, Hunter and Intercom — plus a documented API, webhooks, and MCP documentation for ChatGPT and Claude. Contact management sits at 4 on customizable fields, pipeline stages, views and automations plus data enrichment with verified contact details; we found no public information on deduplication, merge tooling or required-field validation. Sovereignty sits at 2, the weakest result apart from pricing: no sovereignty attributes are on record, the published picture is a Data Processing Agreement link and a Google security page, the copyright entity is NetHunt Inc., and we found no public information on hosting region, an EU processing option, a subprocessor list, or retention and deletion controls. Sales pipeline runs 3 to 4, automation 4 to 5; data portability runs 2 to 3, where lower scores call the exit undocumented and higher ones credit the API and webhooks as a workable path out. We found no public information on tier names, per-seat prices or renewal terms.
Speaks for it
- Integrations scored 5 and 6, with CRM features unlocking directly in the Gmail inbox and ten named integrations: Gmail, Google Workspace, Apollo, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Slack, Zapier, Hunter and Intercom.
- Documented API and MCP documentation, plus webhooks that move real-time customer data between systems.
- Contact management scored 4 on customizable fields, pipeline stages, views and automations plus data enrichment with verified contact details.
- Automation scored 4 and 5: event triggers launch automated actions on any field change or user activity, with email templates, an email marketing module and web forms.
- Conversations unify across Gmail, Professional Network, WhatsApp, Instagram and VoIP in one place.
Held against it
- Sovereignty scored 2: no sovereignty attributes are on record, and we found no public information on hosting region, an EU processing option, a subprocessor list, or retention and deletion controls.
- Data portability scored 2 and 3: we found no public information on CSV import or export, full-object export covering notes, activity history and attachments, or contractual data-return terms.
- We found no public information on deduplication, merge tooling or required-field validation behind the customization claims.
- Reporting stays at the canned level — sales performance analysis, revenue forecasts, activity tracking per channel and rep, best performing lead sources — and we found no public information on required fields per stage, stage gates or quota tracking.
- We found no public information on tier names, per-seat prices, billing periods or renewal terms; the purchase path is 'Talk to sales', 'Start free trial' and 'Request demo'.
Best for
- You run sales out of Gmail and Google Workspace and want CRM features directly in the inbox.
- Your team sells across WhatsApp, Instagram, Slack and VoIP and needs those conversations unified on one record.
- You want to work with your CRM through ChatGPT or Claude using documented MCP access.
- You need webhooks and a documented API to move real-time customer data between systems.
Avoid if
- You must document where personal data lives, which subprocessors touch it, and retention or deletion controls before a European sign-off — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You need a self-serve exit with full export of notes, activity history and attachments — data portability scored 2 and 3, and API documentation and webhooks are the only exit paths in evidence.
- Your finance team requires stage gates, quota tracking or forecast snapshots before signing off — sales pipeline scored 3 and 4, and the published reporting consists of canned report types.
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
Field customization on any CRM object and enrichment with verified contact details is more than cosmetic, and unified Gmail, messaging and VoIP conversations give records real context. But I found no public information on deduplication, merge tooling, required-field validation or how people, companies and deals relate, so I can't credit the hygiene layer my records actually need. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Customizable fields, pipeline stages and views are evidenced, plus an enrichment feature building 'comprehensive customer profiles with verified contact details' — which is precisely open-web contact data a controller must lawfully document before it enters the record. We found no public information on deduplication, merge tooling, field validation, consent fields or permissioned field access. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Field-level customization on any CRM object plus data enrichment for customer profiles is more than cosmetic, so this sits above the basic tier. But I found no public information on deduplication, field validation, or required-field enforcement — the hygiene a 40-seat team's data quality actually depends on. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Custom fields, pipeline stages, views and automations are all tweakable per the vendor, and data enrichment with verified contact details supports record depth. But we found no public information on deduplication, merge tooling, required-field validation, or field-level history — the hygiene layer that keeps a database worth syncing. 1
The Migrator
The captured page claims any CRM object can be tweaked — fields, pipeline stages, views, automations — plus data enrichment for contact profiles, which is more than cosmetic customization. I found no public information on deduplication or merge tooling, required fields, or field-level history, and hygiene is exactly what decides whether a migration lands clean, so I hold this mid-range. 1
The Skeptic
The vendor markets 'ultra-customizable' objects — fields, pipeline stages, views, automations — plus verified-contact data enrichment, which is more than cosmetic on its face. But the captured copy never gets concrete: I found no public information on field types, validation, required fields, duplicate handling or merge tooling, and customization claims without hygiene receipts age badly once real data lands. 1
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
Customizable pipeline stages, revenue forecasts, per-rep activity tracking and best-performing lead-source reporting would carry a solo pipeline, and web forms feed leads straight in. I found no public information on required fields per stage, win/loss capture, quota tracking or a custom report builder, so the process enforcement I lean on stays unevidenced. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Customizable pipeline stages and named reporting — revenue forecasts, sales performance analysis, activity per channel and rep, best performing lead sources — sit at the canned-reporting level. We found no public information on required fields per stage, stage gates, quota tracking or a custom report builder. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Customizable pipeline stages exist, and the reporting list names revenue forecasts and activity tracking per channel and rep — but everything shown is a canned report type. I found no public information on required fields per stage, win/loss capture, quota tracking, or forecast snapshots, so nothing here a CFO would sign off on. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Pipeline stages are customizable and the reporting list names revenue forecasts plus per-channel, per-rep activity tracking and best-performing lead sources, which is more than a bare kanban. But we found no public information on required fields per stage, stage gates, win/loss capture, quota tracking, or a custom report builder, so nothing shows the process is enforced rather than decorative. 1
The Migrator
Revenue forecasts, sales performance analysis, activity tracking per rep, and best-performing lead sources are listed as reporting capabilities, and pipeline stages are customizable. I found no public information on required fields per stage, stage gates, quota or attainment tracking, or a custom report builder, so nothing evidences a finance-grade process being enforced rather than described. 1
The Skeptic
Revenue forecasts, activity tracking per channel and rep, and best-performing lead sources are named among the reporting capabilities, so finance-facing language exists. Enforcement is the missing receipt — I found no public information on required fields per stage, stage gates, quota tracking, weighted or commit views, or forecast snapshots, so I cannot credit more than mid-table. 1
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
Event triggers fire on any change in fields or user activity, webhooks move data in real time, and automations are listed as customizable — a real start for follow-ups I don't want to babysit. I found no public information on multi-step sequences with delays and branching, round-robin routing or sequence analytics, so I can't credit consultant-free workflow depth. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Triggers on any field change or user activity, configurable automations, an email marketing module and webhooks are evidenced. We found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching, delays, round-robin routing or sequence analytics. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Event triggers on any field change or user activity, with webhooks to move data between systems, is genuine if-this-then-that plus an outbound hook — slightly more than the basic tier. I found no public information on multi-step sequences, branching, delays, or lead routing, so I cannot credit the workflow depth my routing rules need. 1
The RevOps Integrator
Event triggers on any change in CRM fields or user activity, plus webhooks that move real-time customer data between systems, are genuine trigger infrastructure rather than email templates. We found no public information on multi-step sequences with delays and branching, lead routing, sequence analytics, or workflow error handling. 1
The Migrator
Event triggers on any field change or user activity, customizable automations, email templates, an email marketing module, and webhooks point to real multi-step automation. I found no public information on branching, delays, routing, error handling, or workflow count limits, so I cannot credit it beyond the middle of the range. 1
The Skeptic
Event triggers on any field change or user activity, webhooks, templates and an email-marketing module give the building blocks of real automation. I found no public information on multi-step sequences with delays and branching, lead routing or sequence analytics — or on the counts and tier caps that decide whether automation becomes its own upsell at renewal. 1
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
This is a CRM that lives inside Gmail, with a documented API, webhooks, MCP hooks for AI tools, and roughly ten native integrations including Slack, WhatsApp, Instagram and Zapier — that covers my stack nicely. I found no public information on calendar sync specifics, OAuth apps or whether the API matches what the interface can do, so it lands at solid middle ground. 1
The Data Protection Officer
A documented API with MCP documentation, webhooks, and a directory spanning Google Workspace, Slack, WhatsApp, Instagram, Zapier and Intercom is a genuine native layer, with the CRM embedded in Gmail itself. We found no public information on two-way calendar sync, OAuth apps or API parity with the UI; note that the Apollo and Hunter integrations pipe third-party enrichment into the record, widening subprocessor exposure. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The Gmail-native pitch is deep by design, backed by a ten-name native directory (Google Workspace, Slack, WhatsApp, Instagram and more), webhooks, and public API plus MCP documentation for AI clients. I found no public information on calendar sync, API rate limits or UI parity, or an OAuth app ecosystem, which keeps it below the deep-stack tier. 1
The RevOps Integrator
The strongest area of the captured pages: the product lives natively inside Gmail with CRM features unlocked in the inbox, Google Workspace, Slack, WhatsApp, Instagram, Intercom and Zapier are named, webhooks are published, and API and MCP documentation exist for ChatGPT and Claude access. We found no public information on calendar sync specifically, API limits, OAuth app publishing, or a marketplace — the pages name a Google Workspace integration without stating calendar sync. 1
The Migrator
Gmail and Google Workspace are positioned as the product's native home rather than an add-on, alongside WhatsApp, Instagram, Slack, Intercom, Zapier and others, with webhooks, a documented API, and MCP access for AI tools. I found no public information on calendar sync, API rate limits, or API parity with the interface, so the depth claims stay at marketing level. 1
The Skeptic
Ten named native connections including Gmail-native operation, plus documented API, webhooks and MCP documentation for ChatGPT and Claude — a modest but real directory. The gaps a buyer hits fast: I found no public information on two-way calendar sync, API rate limits, OAuth apps or API parity with the UI, and anything beyond the messaging-and-Google stack routes through Zapier. 1
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
The copyright reads NetHunt Inc. and a Data Processing Agreement is published, which is the bare minimum trail. I found no public information on EU hosting options, subprocessors, retention or deletion controls, so anyone holding European personal data is signing blind on where it actually lives. 1
The Data Protection Officer
The copyright entity is NetHunt Inc., and we found no public information on hosting location, any EU region, or a subprocessor list — so where other people's personal data actually lives and under whose law cannot be determined from public pages. A published Data Processing Agreement is the floor, but the open-web enrichment integrations broaden third-party exposure that nothing on the captured pages documents. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The pages publish a Data Processing Agreement link and a Google security page, and the copyright holder is NetHunt Inc. I found no public information on hosting region, a subprocessor list, or a European entity, so a DPO could not sign this off on current evidence. 1
The RevOps Integrator
The copyright names NetHunt Inc. and a Data Processing Agreement is published alongside a Google security page, which is a start. But we found no public information on hosting location, an EU processing option, a subprocessor list, retention, or deletion controls — with an Inc.-named entity and no documented EU footprint, the exposure is simply unnamed. 1
The Migrator
The only entity named is NetHunt Inc., and a Data Processing Agreement link plus a Google Security page are the entire public picture — no sovereignty attributes are on record at all. I found no public information on hosting regions, an EU processing option, or a subprocessor list, and for a European buyer's personal data that is near the bottom of the range. 1
The Skeptic
The sovereignty record amounts to a Data Processing Agreement link and a Google security page; the copyright line reads 'NetHunt Inc.', and I found no public information on hosting region, EU processing options, a subprocessor list, or retention and deletion controls. For a product built to live inside Gmail and Google Workspace, Google's own footprint is the residency question, and nothing captured answers it. 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
API documentation exists, which suggests my data isn't hostage to a support ticket forever, but that is the entire picture I got. I found no public information on export formats, whether notes, files and activity history come out, import tooling with dedupe, or migration help in either direction — and exit terms are my insurance policy. 1
The Data Protection Officer
API documentation and webhooks that move real-time customer data between systems give a technical path out of the product. We found no public information on CSV import or export, full-object export covering history, attachments and relations, guided migration, or contractual data-return terms. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
Public API documentation is the only exit path in evidence, and webhooks suggest machine-readable data movement is possible. I found no public information on CSV import with mapping, export completeness including notes, activities and files, or migration tooling, so a move would be an engineering project of unknown scope. 1
The RevOps Integrator
A documented API plus webhooks give an engineering path to move records out in real time, which is a real exit hatch. We found no public information on self-serve CSV import or export, guided migration from other CRMs, dry-run or dedupe on import, or whether activity history and attachments leave with the data. 1
The Migrator
This is the criterion that decides it for me, and the public pages say almost nothing: an API documentation link, Zapier, and webhooks are the only signs data can move programmatically. I found no public information on self-serve import or migration tooling, on export of full objects including notes and activity history, or on contractual data-return terms — exit here would be an undocumented project, and I score it accordingly. 1
The Skeptic
API documentation and webhooks exist, which gives data a door out in principle. I found no public information on self-serve import with mapping, on whether export covers activity history, attachments and relations, or on contractual data-return terms — an undocumented exit has a way of becoming a paid consulting engagement. 1
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
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
There's a free trial, a request-demo link and a 'Talk to sales' button, and no tier price, per-seat figure, billing period or renewal term anywhere I could check. As the person paying with their own card for one to five seats, I cannot compute even a first month's invoice from the public pages, and I found no public information on seat minimums either. 1
The Data Protection Officer
A free trial is offered, but no tier prices, billing periods, seat minimums or limits appear on the captured pages, and the purchase path runs through 'Talk to sales'. A buyer cannot compute any real invoice from public information. 1
The Sales Ops Lead
The captured page carries only a free-trial link and a talk-to-sales prompt. I found no public information on tier names, per-seat prices, billing period, VAT treatment, or renewal terms — no buyer can compute even a single-seat invoice from what is published. 1
The RevOps Integrator
The captured pages show a free trial alongside "Talk to sales" and "Request demo" paths, but we found no public prices, tier definitions, billing periods, seat terms, or renewal rules on them. A buyer cannot compute any invoice from this evidence. 1
The Migrator
The only purchase-path fact is a free trial; the same navigation offers Talk to sales and Request demo, and I found no public prices for any tier. A buyer cannot compute a single invoice figure from what is published, which lands at the bottom of the range. 1
The Skeptic
The captured page offers 'Talk to sales', 'Start free trial' and 'Request demo', and I found no public information on tier names, seat prices, billing periods, seat minimums, usage meters or renewal rules. Nothing captured lets a buyer compute so much as a one-seat invoice at signup, let alone at renewal. 1
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 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 | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- 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.
- We found no public information on pricing on the pages we read (nethunt.com, nethunt.com/legal/privacy, help.nethunt.com/en/settings/how-to-import-data-from-spreadsheets, help.nethunt.com/en/getting-started-with-net-hunt-crm/data-import, help.nethunt.com/en/getting-started-with-net-hunt-crm/setting-up-your-first-sales-pipeline, help.nethunt.com/en/views-and-reports/pipeline-reports and 5 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 8 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
- 5 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
- 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 data 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 integrations 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 subprocessors 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
- 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 (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.nethunt.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage nethunt.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Contact & data model — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Contact & data model — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Pipeline & forecasting — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Automation & workflows — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Integrations & API — found from sitemap nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Integrations & API — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Import, export & exit — found from sitemap help.nethunt.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →