Fin is Intercom’s AI Agent for customer service, designed to deliver high-quality answers, even for complex queries. It works with any helpdesk, or it can be paired with Intercom’s next-generation Helpdesk to get the full Intercom Customer Service Suite.
$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.
$15
per month
Zendesk Chat
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Zendesk Chat (formerly Zopim) is a live chat tool developed by the Singaporean company also called Zopim, acquired by Zendesk in April 2014.
$11.20
per month
Pricing
Fin by Intercom
Olark
Zendesk Chat
Editions & Modules
Fin with your current helpdesk
$0.99
one-time fee per outcome
Copilot add-on
$35
per month per user
Pro
$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
Lite
$0
per user
Basic
$14
per user
Advanced
$25
per user
Premium
$55
per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Fin by Intercom
Olark
Zendesk Chat
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Optional
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.
—
The pricing above is price per user per month. You will get a discount when you opt for annual payment.
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 …
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, …
Zendesk didn't have an AI to field question which is the biggest time saver Fin has given us. On my end, I think Zendesk was easier to navigate (I've been in both systems for the same amount of time atp). However, the amount of work Fin has been able to field for us is worth …
Beats them all in my opinion, Intercom's ease of use and intuitive design cannot be beat compared to others. We had a look at both Zendesk and Freshchat in the past and we saw very quickly that we're already using the best tool for the job. My only "complaint" would be the cost …
Intercom is just so much better; Our company was using both Zendesk and Intercom for two different products we offer. We brought them all over to Intercom, and they are really happy about the shift. They didn't use any AI in Zendesk, though, so Fin is their first experience …
We used it a few years ago, and it was not as feature-rich for our needs. It lacked true AI capabilities, was hard for users to understand, and created workaround issues. The internal ticket system was difficult to use and led to many missed issues and calls.
Fin by Intercom outperforms Zendesk in almost all metrics as a user-friendly, experienced-focused platform. Zendesk's chat functionality is more limited than Intercom's and the AI agent is not as helpful.
Our primary business partner uses Zendesk, and this is what we use to …
I used Zendesk briefly but found it difficult to navigate — I often couldn’t tell what was going on or how to simply reply to a ticket. In contrast, Intercom is much more intuitive and user-friendly. Its clean interface and support for multiple communication formats like …
As explained previously, most of these platforms were focused on tickets, most reports only work with tickets, there is no way to postpone a service without turning it into a ticket, and since our response time target is a maximum of 2 minutes, these platforms were unable to …
Intercom missing the merging option, it's way easier but the merging is very important. However, Zendesk is little bit old fashion and not modern like Intercom
Intercom does an exceptional job of linking my service offerings to customer support. Its proactive support is a significant differentiator among all these competitors, which sets it apart the most. It dramatically enhances customer engagement and streamlines communication …
We found Intercom's layout to be more user-friendly and the options for integration and setup to be much easier than with other products we looked for.
LiveChat was our previous solution and was so bad for us that we decided to switch - the functionalities are so basic and/or requires dev support for everything, that it was hard to maintain. Zendesk was not a flexible enough system for us and the LiveChat support was not good …
Intercom was easier to use and more seamless with their features. There was a lot more we could do with Intercom right out of the gate so we chose it over the other software we were trying. We've been with Intercom for around 7 years now and are still happy with it.
Intercom is a lot smoother and has more integration ability. It's macro features are a lot easier to navigate and control as well. The help center is also a huge bonus and the way it integrates into the chat is a lot less stressful to put together and utilize. Intercom makes …
I didn't make the call. It was my manager or leadership who decided that, so this one does not apply to me, unfortunately. However, as I've mentioned, it should've been for ease of use and efficiency. The exact reasons are not disclosed to me. Great job Intercom you're doing it …
Olark
Verified User
Manager
Chose Olark
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 …
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.
Zendesk Chat
Verified User
Administrator
Chose Zendesk Chat
Olark Chat - Not as many customization options as Zendesk Salesforce - More expensive Syntellect - Old application based system instead of a cloud based software
ZD chat is much better at being streamlined with ZD email, obviously. but the functionality of Intercom and the way it worked was a lot cleaner. However, we use a round-robin style of messaging with our CSRs, and ZD chat does this much better.
Zendesk is one of the most expensive providers on the market, but also the most functional one. We have 6 business facts. Based on them we composed 17 needs (functions) from the chat provider. Zendesk was one of the leaders in the overall evaluation, while it was cheaper than …
A prospect lands on my site to ask about building profile sizes, wind/snow ratings, installation timelines, or warranty coverage. What Fin does well is deliver instant, consistent answers, pull from approved specs and positioning, and keep the conversation moving without human involvement.
Olark chat is easy to set up and use. You can have more than one user logged in to monitor the chat on different computers. This makes a fast response time more likely. Although you have to be sure to keep your volume up on the computer so you hear the sound letting you know there's a chat waiting. I like that you can see the customers path through the website and you can put clickable links while you are in a chat to guide the customer to a product or a help page. Plus you can see if they actually went there. This makes it easier to upsell
Zendesk Chat is suited for all the support teams that provide real-time assistance. Like if someone wants to block the debit/credit card, it is a high-priority case that needs real-time assistance. Whereas issues like close my account, and invoice request doesn't need real-time assistance, where Zendesk tickets support will be perfect.
Olark is user friendly for both sides of the CHAT conversation. If you are initiating the chat, or the one receiving the chat, it is extremely easy to follow and use. There are many different levels of computer use comprehension and Olark is for every level.
Olark has reporting features to allow you to check the quality of your employees chat abilities as well as their productivity. It provides feedback for the employee themselves to also see how they are doing and take any suggestions the customer may leave for them regarding their chat experience.
Olark is very affordable and offers you the option, at a low cost, to look bigger and more professional that you even are. We were a smaller company and has the chat option with Olark and now have grown tremendously and STILL have the Olark chat option. Olark allowed us to grow and provide professionalism to our customers .
The Olark program allows you to set up quick responses to keep your customer from waiting, and to allow your employees to not have to retype the same response over and over. It is a great program that the employees really enjoy as well. It reminds you if you forgot to log out when you left your desk and provides your customer a quick note giving them the option to send the chat as an email inquiry instead, so you don't miss a thing.
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.
Not really an area of improvement for Olark specifically, but I will offer that it is incredibly important to keep in mind your company's "shopping hours" or peak traffic times (there is a Reports feature on the software that allows you to analyze peak traffic times).
Transcript history can be a little tricky - if you're searching for a specific past conversation, sometimes you may get multiple search results and have to sift through them until you find exactly what you're looking for.
I'd also offer that you will occasionally come across folks that are on your site to cyberbully or say nonsensical things. While there isn't an absolute fullproof way to deal with this, Olark does offer a nice "block" feature to disregard any unwanted conversations.
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.
To be honest, renewal decisions are not currently within my power. Hypothetically speaking, I'm very comfortable with the platform, have used it daily for nearly a year, and would see no reason to switch to anything else. The small criticisms I had are not significant enough to deter me from using Olark. It's a user friendly, effective tool for our department.
Due to staffing issues, we have temporarily stopped offering chat as an available channel. We're also interested in the best ways to integrate chat with our FAQs and AI to provide quick responses, either during off-hours or prior to speaking with a live agent. I've also found that reporting is rather limited where some of the interesting and useful data made available and visible during the chat cannot be pulled post-chat; it would be great to pull a high-level report so we can analyze this data.
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.
As mentioned previously, it's a clunky product that lacks user-friendliness. It feels old and behind the times compared to other products we have used. The inability to have a wrap-up time before a new chat comes in is also a big issue for our team.
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.
Our organization does not have any complaints about Olark's Support. Anytime we reached out to them for assistance, we received a prompt, helpful reply! As mentioned previously, we used Olark fairly basically so we didn't have too much need to work with their support team other than a few general questions here and there. They were always pleasant to work with.
Getting assistance and/or troubleshooting anything with Zendesk can be quite frustrating. In my years of experience with Zednesk, I have almost never found the answer to my question without going through multiple articles, ultimately getting frustrated and reaching out to our contact for more assistance. So for a consumer, the support is not as relieving as Zendesk Chat is to our customers in getting the questions answered by us.
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 based on providing the best customer experience. If we were to build this ourselves or to use another platform we would be taking on the upkeep, using Fin is just much simpler as it's also our chosen ticketing platform so anything that Fin is not able to answer yet and escalated directly to our team with no extra effort required from our side.
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 their SDK is a snap as well.
Zendesk Chat is far more user friendly than some of the other competitors on the market. It has a very all the features that you require to ensure your customers are contacted in 'real time'. Its main tools include a live chat interface for quick communication, customisable chat widgets to fit your brand, mobile responsiveness for all devices, and canned responses for common questions. The platform can also start chats based on visitor actions, like time on a page or exit intent. A real must for any leading company
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.
Positive impact - Compared to our old system, this newly updated system provides features and functionality that has increased our agent productivity and provided customer insight like we've never had before. This has resulted in fewer hold times and higher customer satisfaction.
Negative impact - Our reporting team still struggles with obtaining the right information from time to time with the chats. This leads to loss of productivity and more resources dedicated to reporting.
Positive impact - Due to Zopim's embed, we are able to more successfully place them on the appropriate self-service portals and pages, reaching a larger audience, and being more readily available to answer our client's questions. This has resulted in an increase in our self-service portal usage, driving down the phone and email support channels, which in turn reduces support costs.
