Fin is an AI Agent for customer service. It automates complex queries, improves resolution times, and delivers consistently high-quality support at scale.
$0.99
one-time fee per outcome
Olark
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Olark is a website live chat tool for engaging website visitors while they browse. It can be used to to track leads, drive sales, provide support.
$19
Per Agent Per Month
Pricing
Fin
Olark
Editions & Modules
Fin with your current helpdesk
$0.99
one-time fee per outcome
Copilot add-on
$35
per month per user
Pro add-on
$99
per month For analysis of 1,000 conversations
Fin with Intercom’s Helpdesk
from $39 + $0.99 per Fin outcome
per month per seat
Self Service
$19.00
Per Agent Per Month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Fin
Olark
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Fin comes with a 90-day money-back guarantee. Here's how it works:
Intercom states that users who sign up for the Fin Guarantee Success Program and do not achieve at least a resolution rate of 65% will be paid $1M. This program is designed for high volume customers.
Eligibility criteria:
High volume customers (over 250k monthly conversions) in North America and Europe. Intercom states that phase one of this program will admit customers on Intercom Helpdesk or Zendesk.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Fin
Olark
Considered Both Products
Fin
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Fin
In personal preference, I would always pick Fin over any of the aforementioned products. For me, it's its easier to set up, very intuitive interface, amazing workflow builder and one of the most important parts it stands out above all, is the team behind Fin. Success and …
We used a much older version of Zendesk six years ago, so the AI features didn't exist back then—which makes it pretty hard to compare. In any case, I immediately found Intercom simpler, more intuitive, and more professional, with features the other platform didn't offer. …
Fin completely surpasses our old system for support requests. Not only can we get granular data for each customer interaction, but we also now have access to top-quality metrics and reporting. The integrative nature of Fin also made it easier to transition platforms by simply …
We selected Intercom over Zendesk as AI was ready to use and Zendesk did not have such features. Overall it was the right decision and everything including the switch to intercom went quite well.
The choice was made before I joined the company, but we've evaluated the usage and purpose of Fin across the years and are still happy with our choice.
Fin far surpasses these other options in platform features and capabilities. Fin allows for side-by-side use by both the Marketing and Support teams, while none of the other similar products did that well. Most platforms are designed for one or the other, not both.
Our previous support platform didn't offer an AI agent (they used it internally for their own tickets, but there were delays with shipping it to their users, i.e., us, so we migrated to Intercom). Our colleagues from different brands within our own company demoed a different …
There are so many AI platforms available, and you could theoretically build a system using the available AI API's from any of the big platforms. However, I dont think it's as easy as this. Intercom is deliberately built for customer service, the features they are releasing a …
Fin by Intercom vs. Zendesk/Salesforce - Fin by Intercom is often cheaper at low-to-mid volumes because it has a lower base platform fee (starting around $29–$39/seat). However, Zendesk AI and Salesforce Agentforce can be more predictable for massive enterprises because they …
I have only used the free versions of ChatGPT and Claude but I will say that Fin by Intercom AI is built specifically around our data that we give it access to, so its going to be a lot much accurate and safer for an organization to use. We have been happy Fin by Intercom users …
Fin beat out our competitors in price, accuracy, ease of set-up/training, and also allowed us a free demo environment during the exploratory phase without needing to sign anything.
Granted I think both Zendesk and Salesforce are very good tools, I still think that Fin by Intercom is the best I've used. Salesforce can be very laggy at times, and there's nothing that can be done about it. The interface is clunky. Zendesk is coming in at a real close second, …
Huge difference: Crisp is immature yet can't read images or send images; the workflows are broken and cannot be relied upon. The agent breaks in between and is yet way behind. It need a lot of work yet and will be good to go in an year or two.
Although we have not utilised a specific chat box like Fin before in other websites, we have used ChatGPT and Claude within our general work. Our Product and Engineering team make use of Devin within Azure Dev Ops to support with their work. However, Fin is the most suitable …
Our organization just made the switch over to Zendesk and Zendesk Chat less than a month ago, so it is difficult to provide an accurate comparison. I will say though, that Zendesk has more robust reporting and far more options for integration. I am confident that Zendesk Chat …
We did use Zendesk chat for a short time but switched to Olark when a colleague suggested Olark was simpler. We were looking for a chat solution that was easy to understand and use visually, plus easy to switch between multiple people when taking turns monitoring chat. And we …
Olark has an easier implementation process and has better functionality such as the ability to send commands through the platform to either create a ticket in your CRM or push an opportunity to salesforce; you're even able to 'push' the end user to a web page. Implementing …
Olark really doesn't stand up against these options. It feels outdated compared to most of them. All of the competition offers page breaks, while Olark does not. I don't really understand why they don't have this simple feature. I can only guess that it's a methodology thing, …
I have not used zopim extensively, but my company has been looking into converting to ZenDesk. The one positive difference I did notice with zopim was the ability to easily email a transcript of a chat - and the user has the option to request it independently of the operator.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Olark
I haven't personally evaluated other sites. Olark is the only one I've used and I like it quite a bit. To this point price and ease of use has given me reason to stay and I don't see that changing.
The main reason was that we had a really hard time integrating the Zendesk chat function into our UI, and once we discovered that Olark would not only integrate seamlessly with our website, but also automatically produce Zendesk support tickets, we were sold.
Fin is fantastic at answering simpler inquiries, where the range and types of questions are easier to categorize. Thereby reducing the subset of possible answers. Where it has shown great improvement - but still needs more improvement - is by becoming a true Agentic AI support engineer that is capable of answering more technically nuanced questions. Our product has a lot of variables used for troubleshooting that cannot be adequately captured in documentation. Even though we provide thousands of pages of spec docs, each issue is unique. Training and empowering Fin to be as good as a Level 1 support engineer is still very challenging.
If you want to have the option to chat on your company website and keep track of those chats, the customer's satisfaction, your employees' capabilities and the repetition of certain inquiries, Olark can truly help your business. We have 4 employees at any given time dedicated to our chat function during business hours. After hours if offers the option to send our customer service team an email with your question on your behalf. Everyone wins.
It seems some users really struggle to figure out how to escalate to a human (especially through email).
Not excited about how "soft" resolutions still count as resolutions and are paid for. Though some abandoned cases appear to be able to be concluded as "the user got the answer they needed", there are others where they clearly didn't, because they just open up another chat (or even more), trying to get more info. This pads the resolution stats and makes it seem more effective than it actually is.
Cost -- Fin is quite expensive. It helps us with scaling coverage, but we're not really saving money.
There is not a way to add a queue. We have guests that get a little impatient when we are very busy. This would allow for the guest to know that we are working on getting to them and not ignoring them.
We have experienced outages this past year, and the communication in regards to what is happening is not the best.
We have been and will be continuing our journey with Intercom and nothing too concerning has happened that I have experienced or heard of that has us on the edge yet. If it ever happens it will be something along the lines of "Outgrowing" the use of need of the platform.
I think it's a great feature to be more in touch with a customer base - it saves time, money, and is often extremely effective in terms of answering customer questions and addressing concerns. Although the subject of product renew is not necessarily in my hands, I strongly advocate for the program's future use
The platform is overall clear and intuitive. As with any new platform, there's a learning curve, but that wasn't an issue for our team (and it shouldn't be an issue for others). Fin options are scattered across several submenus, and I'd like them grouped together, but I also like having all those training-related tabs open at all times, so it's not much of a real issue for me.
I can get help by asking Fin questions about itself. It answers accurately, citing its own Help Center resources with visuals. It can reason and dialogue well. But when it comes to getting human support for Fin, it is not as quick. It can sometimes take a few days. They are polite and well-meaning. Some things aren't their fault (product limitations), but there was one occasion where something took a long time to resolve with lots of back and forth but it was I who found out the error in the end that they missed, so they didn't really help resolve it.
I've used the Olark knowledge base and searched online for help on questions I had. The help section is easy to use. I have found most of the answers I need within minutes. Plus their help section has a chat feature in a box on the same level as the answers so when I did need more help it was right there for me. (didn't need to search for it on another part of the page) This box has a link to open a support ticket, twitter link for quick answers, and a systems notice
Fin completely surpasses our old system for support requests. Not only can we get granular data for each customer interaction, but we also now have access to top-quality metrics and reporting. The integrative nature of Fin also made it easier to transition platforms by simply integrating with the previous system.
We did use Zendesk chat for a short time but switched to Olark when a colleague suggested Olark was simpler. We were looking for a chat solution that was easy to understand and use visually, plus easy to switch between multiple people when taking turns monitoring chat. And we liked how it fit on the screen of the website - easy to see but not intrusive
New role opportunities — Using the “Fin-first” approach has reduced the workload for our Tier 1 team, giving them more time to focus on their own career growth. It’s also opened the door to a dedicated, AI-focused role, where a team member regularly reviews Fin’s answers and makes updates to help it perform even better.
Enabling Fin has also reduced our response time and allowed us to meet SLA's.