Avoma vs Fathom

On annual billing Fathom runs $16 per seat per month against Avoma's $19, a real saving for agencies staffing many seats across client accounts. Both tools support in-person and mobile capture and both offer a bot-free option, and both publish unlimited recording storage, so those points are even. Avoma does lead on transcript export, offering VTT and TXT files where Fathom is copy and paste only, useful for agencies archiving client transcripts. Since price is what decides this use case and Fathom is clearly cheaper, Fathom is the better fit.

Fathom integrates with Slack, Notion, Asana, and Zapier, putting meeting notes directly where async engineering teams track work, including Notion boards. Avoma's integrations, Slack, ClickUp, Outreach, Salesloft, and Aircall, lean more toward sales workflows. Both tools generate automatic action items, support a public API, and produce AI meeting summaries, so execution is even there. On an annual seat, Fathom costs $16 per month while Avoma costs $19 per month. For a team that wants standups landing hands-off in Notion or similar tools, Fathom is the stronger match.

Both Avoma and Fathom include a HIPAA BAAHIPAA BAA - A signed Business Associate Agreement that lets you handle protected health information under US healthcare privacy law., so that requirement is covered either way. The decisive difference is AI training: Avoma excludes customer data from AI training, while Fathom does not, a meaningful gap for legal, healthcare, and security-conscious teams that need a no-training guarantee. Both tools offer a bot-free capture option and support GDPR and EU data residency. For teams where a strict no-training policy is non-negotiable, Avoma is the clear choice.

Both tools offer clips and highlight reels, full video recording, and an ask-your-meeting AI chat, so the core research workflow is even. Avoma pulls ahead on the details researchers rely on for cross-session work: it exports transcripts in VTT and TXT formats, while Fathom supports copy and paste only, and Avoma covers 60 languages against Fathom's 38. For researchers who need to export and search across sessions in multiple languages, Avoma is the better fit.

Both tools produce AI meeting summaries and speaker identification, so interview notes come out clean either way. Fathom is cheaper on an annual seat, $16 versus Avoma's $19, which matters for high-volume interviewing. But Avoma exports transcripts in VTT and TXT formats, while Fathom only supports copy and paste, a real limitation for recruiters who need clean files to move into an ATS. Since export quality is what interview transcripts most depend on, Avoma is the better fit despite costing more.

Avoma connects to five CRMs, Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Copper, and Zoho, while Fathom covers just two, Salesforce and HubSpot. For sales teams whose top priority is getting every call synced to the CRM, that is a significant gap, particularly for reps on Pipedrive, Copper, or Zoho who would have no direct path with Fathom. Both tools generate automatic action items and clips and highlight reels, so the rest of the workflow is comparable. The wider CRM reach makes Avoma the stronger choice.

Avoma has no free tier at all, while Fathom offers 5 advanced summaries per month with unlimited recording on its free plan, plus unlimited free-tier transcription minutes. That is a real starting point for an individual before paying anything. When it is time to upgrade, Fathom's paid seat is also cheaper, $20 per month versus Avoma's $29. Both tools include an AI meeting summary. For solo users and tiny teams prioritizing a capable free plan and a low entry price, Fathom is the clear winner.