SStatWharf
Menu

Best AI Voice Agents Customer Support Platforms (2026): Top 10 Compared

Updated September 2026By StatWharf Editorial10 vendorsMethodology

Eight of the ten platforms below publish no rate at all, so the first thing to compare is the meter rather than the number. Sierra bills on completed outcomes, PolyAI on connected minutes, Replicant on usage plus a flat annual delivery fee, and Yellow.ai on resolutions above a free allowance. Fin publishes USD 0.99 per outcome for its text channels but prices Fin Voice separately by quote. How entries are ordered.

On this page
  1. Comparison table
  2. Vendor details
  3. Sierra
  4. PolyAI
  5. Parloa
  6. Replicant
  7. Decagon
  8. boost.ai
  9. Yellow.ai
  10. Maven AGI
  11. Intercom Fin
  12. Regal
  13. How to choose
  14. Frequently asked questions
  15. Suggest a vendor

Compare at a glance

Select a vendor for details and sources. Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.

AI Voice Agents Customer Support Platforms: vendor fit and recorded pricing
VendorConsider forPricing notesStandout
SierraenterpriseBrands that want the vendor paid only when a support conversation actually resolvesOutcome-based, no published rate; unresolved conversations and escalations in most cases carry no charge (checked Sep 2026)Outcome criteria agreed in writing before billing starts, with consumption pricing for routing-style calls
PolyAIenterpriseContact centres replacing a touch-tone menu on a high-volume phone linePer connected minute, no published rate; tuning, maintenance and 24/7 support stated as included (checked Sep 2026)A 99.9 percent uptime SLA on customer phone lines is stated as included in every plan
ParloaenterpriseEnterprises that want agent design, simulation, versioning and monitoring in one managed lifecycleQuote-based, no pricing page published; every route on the site leads to a demo booking (checked Sep 2026)Simulation and evaluation tooling for testing an agent before it reaches live calls, with versioning
ReplicantenterpriseContact centres that want deployment and ongoing tuning covered by a flat annual feeQuote-based, pay-as-you-go, month-to-month or multi-year terms; Replicare delivery is a flat annual fee (checked Sep 2026)Deterministic code-based guardrails held outside the model prompt, with supervisory agents auditing each turn
DecagonenterpriseConsumer brands running voice, chat and email support from one agent and one knowledge baseQuote-based, no pricing page published; the /pricing path returns a 404 (checked Sep 2026)Voice support stated across more than 70 languages with automatic detection and mid-call switching
boost.aienterpriseRegulated European organisations that need control over which answers a model may generateQuote-based, no pricing page published; the /pricing path returns the site's 404 content (checked Sep 2026)A hybrid design pairing trained intent understanding with generative answers, so autonomy is scoped by topic
Yellow.aienterpriseTeams that want to test an agent at no cost before committing to an enterprise contractFree plan with 500 chat sessions a month included, then USD 0.99 per resolution; Enterprise is quote-based (checked Sep 2026)The only platform here with a permanent free tier and a published per-resolution rate above it
Maven AGIenterpriseSupport teams keeping their existing telephony and adding an agent in front of itQuote-based; the /pricing path resolves to a demo booking page rather than rates (checked Sep 2026)Connects over SIP, PSTN and WebRTC into Twilio, RingCentral, Cisco, Zendesk Talk and Genesys
Intercom Finmid-marketTeams already running Fin on chat and email that want the same agent answering the phoneFin Voice quoted and limited to selected customers; Fin on text channels USD 0.99 per outcome, 50 outcomes a month minimum (checked Sep 2026)A published outcome definition listing exactly which four events are billable and at what rate
RegalenterpriseLarge contact centres that meet its stated scale threshold and run outbound as well as inboundQuote-based, priced on features used with discounts for higher spend and longer terms (checked Sep 2026)A published scale threshold of roughly 25 agents and 100,000 call minutes a month before the product fits

These comparisons draw on public product information, not hands-on testing of every tool. Source records identify available references and checks; missing evidence is marked. Buyer fit is an editorial assessment, not a measured performance score. How to use this research.

Support leaders shopping for an AI voice agent meet a comparison problem before they meet a product problem. The category contains developer platforms priced per API minute, contact centre suites priced per seat, and agent vendors priced per resolved conversation, and the three cannot be compared on a single number.

The ten platforms below are the ones sold specifically for customer support calls. Each entry records the meter the vendor publishes, the rate where one exists, and the date of the check. Eight publish no rate at all, which is itself the most useful finding on the page.

Vendor details and trade-offs

Sierra

enterprise
sierra.ai ↗
Consider forSupport organisations that want billing tied to resolved conversations rather than seats or minutes, since Sierra states it is paid only when an agreed outcome completes
Pricing notesOutcome-based, with no rate published. Sierra states that payment is tied to a tangible business outcome such as a resolved support conversation, a saved cancellation or an upsell, that an unresolved conversation in most cases carries no charge, and that an escalated case in most cases carries no charge. Criteria for each outcome are described as agreed upfront. Where an outcome meter does not fit, routing or greeter-style interactions are priced by conversation count instead (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluatePricing that charges nothing in most cases when the agent fails to resolve or hands the call to a person

Sierra sells a conversational agent that spans voice alongside chat, SMS, messaging and email, and its clearest published differentiator is the commercial model rather than a feature. The company argues that seat-based customer experience vendors face a conflict of interest, because an agent that works well reduces the number of licensed seats the same vendor sells. Its answer is to charge per completed outcome.

The published detail matters more than the label. Sierra states that an outcome is a tangible business result such as a resolved support conversation, a saved cancellation or an upsell. It states that an unresolved conversation in most cases carries no charge, and that an escalated case in most cases carries no charge either. Criteria for each outcome type are agreed before billing begins. Where the meter does not fit, routing and greeter-style interactions can be priced by conversation count instead, because those interactions produce no resolution to count.

No rate is published for any of these models, so a support leader can understand exactly what triggers a charge but cannot estimate the annual figure without contacting sales.

Potential strengths

  • The published model puts containment risk on the vendor, since an unresolved conversation in most cases produces no invoice line
  • Outcome definitions are stated to be agreed before deployment, which turns the billing rule into a written term

Trade-offs

  • No rate, band or floor appears anywhere public, so a buyer cannot size a contract before entering a sales process
  • An outcome meter needs an agreed definition of resolution, a negotiation most support teams have never run
Sources and status
  • Product reference
  • Pricing source
  • Billing terms: Per completed outcome, with agreed criteria per outcome type and optional consumption pricing for routing-style interactions
  • Source review: checked Sep 23, 2026
  • Vendor confirmation: not confirmed

PolyAI

enterprise
poly.ai ↗
Consider forOrganisations whose main support channel is a phone line with measurable handle time, since PolyAI prices per minute and commits to an uptime SLA on that line
Pricing notesPriced on a per-minute basis for ongoing use of the voice agent, with no rate published. PolyAI states that the per-minute price includes proactive performance improvements, maintenance and 24/7 support. Every plan is stated to include a web ticket portal with a 24/7/365 emergency support phone line, a 99.9 percent uptime SLA on customer phone lines, monitoring, upgrades to the latest features, and security controls with compliance certificates and regular audits (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateOngoing tuning and an emergency support phone line are stated as part of the per-minute rate rather than a services line item

PolyAI is a voice-first vendor whose product targets the inbound support line specifically rather than a general agent surface. The platform is built around Agent Studio for design and monitoring, a dialog agent the company calls Wren, and a dialog model it calls Frontier. Published use cases read as a list of contact centre call reasons: account management, authentication, call routing, billing and payments, booking and reservations, order management and troubleshooting.

The pricing page states a single structure. Ongoing use of the voice agent is priced per minute, and that rate is stated to include proactive performance improvements, maintenance and 24/7 support. The page then lists what every plan includes: a web ticket portal with a 24/7/365 emergency support phone line, a 99.9 percent uptime SLA on phone lines, monitoring, upgrades to the latest features, and data security with compliance certificates and regular audits.

Industries named on the site are regulated and high-call-volume sectors including financial services, healthcare, insurance, retail, telecom and utilities. Because the invoice tracks connected minutes, both containment and average handle time move the bill.

Potential strengths

  • The inclusions list is unusually specific for a quote-based product, naming the SLA, the support channels and the upgrade commitment
  • A per-minute meter is familiar to any contact centre that already buys telephony, so modelling cost needs no new measurement

Trade-offs

  • A per-minute meter rewards shorter calls, not resolved ones, so a fast transfer to a human can cost less than a slow success
  • No per-minute figure is published, so the rate depends entirely on negotiated volume
Sources and status
  • Product reference
  • Pricing source
  • Billing terms: Per minute of voice agent use, with tuning, monitoring, upgrades and support stated as included in the rate
  • Source review: checked Sep 23, 2026
  • Vendor confirmation: not confirmed

Parloa

enterprise
parloa.com ↗
Consider forEnterprise CX teams that need to test and version a voice agent under change control before it answers customer calls, since Parloa builds its platform around that lifecycle
Pricing notesQuote-based. Parloa publishes no pricing page; the site returns a 404 at /pricing and routes every commercial path to a demo booking or a contact sales form. No band, floor or meter is stated publicly (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateA four-stage agent lifecycle of design, test, deploy and monitor, with simulations and evaluations as a named platform stage

Parloa sells what it calls an AI Agent Management Platform, and the framing is deliberate: the product is organised around managing an agent through its life rather than around building one. The platform page names four stages. Design and integrate covers Parloa Studio, pre-built and custom skills, subtask agents and integrations. Test and iterate covers simulations, evaluations and versioning. Deploy and scale covers agent composition across chat, messaging and voice. Monitor and improve covers Parloa Lens, a conversation store and a data hub.

Channels named are phone, messaging, chat and click-to-call, integrating into contact centre and CRM platforms rather than replacing them. The company states support for bringing an organisation's own speech and language models, which matters to buyers with an existing model contract or a data residency constraint.

Compliance claims listed include ISO 27001:2022, ISO 17442:2020, SOC 2 Type 1 and Type 2, PCI DSS, HIPAA and DORA, the last relevant to European financial services. No pricing information exists publicly; the /pricing path returns a 404.

Potential strengths

  • Testing is a first-class stage rather than a feature, with simulations, evaluations and versioning named on the platform page
  • The platform supports bringing an organisation's own speech-to-text, text-to-speech and language models rather than fixing the stack

Trade-offs

  • Nothing about cost is published, not even a meter, so a shortlist cannot be sized without sales contact
  • The positioning is enterprise throughout, and no self-serve or trial path appears on the site
Sources and status

Replicant

enterprise
replicant.com ↗
Consider forSupport operations in regulated sectors that need business rules enforced outside the language model, since Replicant codifies policy in deterministic guardrails
Pricing notesQuote-based. Replicant describes pay-as-you-go pricing with contract terms that can be month-to-month or multi-year, an agreed business outcome used for performance evaluation, and an ROI analysis during the sales process. Its Replicare delivery model is described as one flat annual fee covering everything needed to deploy, maintain and continuously improve the agents, with unlimited use cases, delivery support and model updates included. No figure is published for either component (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateBusiness rules and security policies held in code outside the model prompt, which the vendor states guarantees adherence

Replicant automates contact centre conversations across voice, chat and SMS, and its architecture argument is the part a support leader should read first. Rather than instructing a language model to follow policy, the company states that business rules and security policies are codified outside the model prompt, that multiple models are orchestrated across speech recognition, speech synthesis and reasoning, and that supervisory agents audit every conversation turn in real time for brand compliance, hallucinations and policy violations.

Infrastructure claims follow the same pattern: an in-house telephony stack with third-party backups, workloads distributed across regions and cloud providers, and vendor-agnostic model redundancy. Published scale figures include more than 100 million conversations automated over eight years. Certifications listed are SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA, PCI DSS, GDPR and CCPA.

Two uptime figures appear on the site, greater than 99.95 percent on the platform page and greater than 99.999 percent on the voice page. Those are materially different commitments, so the contracted figure belongs on the first call agenda. Commercially, usage is separated from delivery, with Replicare charged as one flat annual fee.

Potential strengths

  • Policy enforcement sits outside the prompt in deterministic code, which is an auditable design rather than a tuning promise
  • The Replicare flat annual fee removes the change orders and statements of work that usually follow a conversational AI deployment

Trade-offs

  • The site publishes two different uptime figures, more than 99.95 percent on the platform page and more than 99.999 percent on the voice page, so the contracted number has to be confirmed in writing
  • No price, band or floor is published for either the usage component or the annual delivery fee
Sources and status

Decagon

enterprise
decagon.ai ↗
Consider forSupport teams that need one agent answering across voice, chat and email with shared memory, since Decagon builds all three channels on the same platform
Pricing notesQuote-based. Decagon publishes no pricing page; the /pricing path returns a 404 and every commercial route ends at a demo request. No meter, band or floor is stated publicly (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateAgent Operating Procedures enforced as guardrails, with an always-on QA product scoring calls rather than sampling them

Decagon sells AI agents for customer support across voice, chat and email, and treats the three as surfaces of one agent rather than separate products. The voice page states support for more than 70 languages with automatic detection and language switching, turn-taking that handles interruptions, customisable voice profiles, outbound calling, and escalation that transfers a call to a human with a concise summary attached.

The platform around the agent carries the differentiation. Agent Operating Procedures define the workflows an agent may run and are enforced as guardrails. Watchtower is described as always-on quality assurance that scores conversations rather than sampling them. Experiments runs live A/B tests and Duet is the agent-assist product for human agents.

Published customer stories include Chime, Duolingo, Rippling, Oura, Noom, Curology and ClassPass. Nothing about cost is published, so a buyer cannot establish whether the meter is a resolution, a minute or a seat before contacting sales.

Potential strengths

  • Cross-channel memory means a caller who first used chat does not restate the problem on the phone
  • Quality assurance is a named product rather than a report, with scoring applied to conversations continuously

Trade-offs

  • No pricing information of any kind is published, including the meter
  • The customer list is weighted to consumer subscription brands, so support patterns in heavy industry or public sector are less evidenced
Sources and status

boost.ai

enterprise
boost.ai ↗
Consider forBanks, insurers, telecoms and public sector bodies that must limit generative answers to approved topics, since boost.ai pairs deterministic intent handling with generative capability
Pricing notesQuote-based. boost.ai publishes no pricing page; the /pricing path serves the site's 404 content and every commercial route ends at a demo request or a contact form. No meter, band or floor is stated publicly (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateA voice testing studio that places automated test calls and reports issues in implementation and conversation design

boost.ai is a Norwegian conversational AI vendor whose positioning is control rather than autonomy. The platform page describes a hybrid architecture combining trained natural language understanding with generative and agentic capability, so that an organisation can allow autonomous behaviour where it is safe and hold deterministic control where it is critical. For a bank or an insurer with an approval process around customer-facing answers, that distinction is the buying decision.

Voice is presented as built into the same platform rather than a separate product, running call centre automation alongside digital channels. Agents are built in a no-code conversation builder, and pre-built industry modules load use cases, knowledge sources and compliance guardrails.

Testing is covered by two named tools. A persona-based testing tool finds jailbreak vulnerabilities and knowledge gaps before launch, and a voice testing studio automates test calls and reports issues in implementation and conversation design. Security claims include ISO 27001 and ISO 27701 certification, GDPR compliance and controls for data residency and encryption. No pricing exists publicly.

Potential strengths

  • The hybrid architecture lets an organisation grant autonomy where it is safe and keep deterministic control where it is not, which suits regulated approval processes
  • Pre-built industry modules ship with use cases, knowledge sources and compliance guardrails, shortening the first deployment

Trade-offs

  • No pricing information is published and the /pricing path is a 404, so cost cannot be estimated publicly
  • The industry focus is narrow, covering financial services, insurance, telecom and public sector, so retail or travel buyers will find fewer reference deployments
Sources and status

Yellow.ai

enterprise
yellow.ai ↗
Consider forSupport teams that want to build and test an agent before a procurement cycle, since Yellow.ai publishes a free tier with a stated overage rate
Pricing notesThe Free plan includes one AI agent and 500 chat sessions a month, then USD 0.99 per resolution. It caps at two agents, 1,000 User360 records and one active campaign with ten templates, with limited access to voice, email, custom integrations and the AI copilot. The Enterprise plan is contact-us and is listed as unlimited across agents, sessions, builder access, integrations and campaigns, with 35-plus channels, 150-plus out-of-box integrations and SOC 2, GDPR and ISO compliance. No Enterprise figure is published (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateA published per-resolution rate on a free tier, which lets a team measure real cost per ticket before negotiating

Yellow.ai is an enterprise agentic AI platform covering voice, chat and email, with its voice products branded VoiceX and, more recently, Nexus Vox. The company states that Nexus Vox can clone a voice in ten seconds and deploy across more than 500 languages, while the voice automation page states support for over 135 languages and 97 percent intent accuracy using its DynamicNLP model. Those two figures do not agree, and a buyer should ask which list is contractual.

The pricing page is the reason this entry is comparable at all. A Free plan includes one AI agent and 500 chat sessions a month, after which the published rate is USD 0.99 per resolution. The plan caps at two agents and 1,000 User360 records, and marks voice, email, custom integrations and the AI copilot as limited. Enterprise is contact-us with unlimited agents, sessions and integrations.

Named voice customers include Sony, Waste Connections and Ferrellgas. One corporate fact belongs in a procurement file: the company states it is going public through a USD 550 million merger with Bluerock Acquisition Corp on Nasdaq.

Potential strengths

  • A free tier with a published overage rate is the only way on this page to establish a real cost per resolution without a sales process
  • Voice, chat and email run on one platform with stated integrations into Zendesk, Freshdesk, HubSpot and Genesys

Trade-offs

  • The free tier's voice access is marked limited, so the published rate does not establish the cost of a voice deployment
  • Two different language counts appear on the site, more than 500 on the Nexus Vox banner and more than 135 on the voice automation page, so the supported list needs confirming
Sources and status

Maven AGI

enterprise
mavenagi.com ↗
Consider forOrganisations that want to keep existing routing, numbers and contact centre platform, since Maven AGI states it connects over SIP, PSTN and WebRTC rather than replacing the stack
Pricing notesQuote-based. The /pricing path resolves to a demo booking page rather than any rate card, and no meter, band or floor is stated publicly. The company positions the product as enterprise and routes all enquiries through a personalised demo (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateBuilt-in audio and text redaction of payment details and personal data before it reaches downstream systems

Maven AGI sells an AI agent platform for customer support, and Maven Voice is its speech-to-speech product for support calls. The positioning is integration rather than replacement: the company states that Maven Voice connects over SIP, PSTN and WebRTC and works with Twilio, RingCentral, Cisco, Zendesk Talk and Genesys, so existing routing, numbers and flows stay in place.

The product description is specific about what the agent does after understanding the call. An orchestration engine is stated to use the organisation's data, rules and system context to choose the next action, executing workflows such as refunds and account updates rather than only answering. Escalation passes summaries, transcripts, recordings and sentiment to the human agent.

The speech layer is assembled from named third-party engines including OpenAI, Phonic and Cartesia, which is a dependency as well as a best-of-breed argument. Security claims cover built-in redaction of payment details and personal data in both audio and text, alongside SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI-DSS and GDPR.

Potential strengths

  • Telephony integration is explicit, covering SIP, PSTN and WebRTC plus named platforms, so no rip and replace is required
  • Redaction of sensitive audio and text is described as built in rather than configured, which shortens a security review

Trade-offs

  • No pricing signal of any kind is published, and the pricing URL is a demo form
  • The speech stack depends on named third-party engines, so model changes upstream are outside the buyer's control
Sources and status

Intercom Fin

mid-market
fin.ai ↗
Consider forSupport teams already using Fin on text channels that want phone calls handled by the same agent and knowledge base, since Fin Voice reuses that configuration
Pricing notesFin Voice is stated to be on a custom pricing plan and currently available to select customers working directly with the sales team, so no voice rate is published. Fin on text channels is USD 0.99 per outcome with a minimum of 50 outcomes a month, and works with other helpdesks including Salesforce, HubSpot, Freshworks and Zendesk. With the Intercom helpdesk it is from USD 0.99 per outcome plus USD 19 per helpdesk seat a month. A resolution, a procedure handoff and a disqualification are each USD 0.99, while a qualification is USD 9.99. (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateA voice model tuned for spoken customer service rather than a general model wrapped in speech conversion

Fin is Intercom's AI agent, and Fin Voice 2 is its phone product. The company states that the common pattern of converting speech to text, processing it with a general model and converting the answer back to speech adds latency and produces answers from a model not built for customer service. Fin Voice 2 instead runs on a model the company calls Apex Flash, fine-tuned for customer service and for how an answer sounds when spoken, with a separate real-time layer handling audio, pacing and conversational flow. Published results of that change are a 24.5 percent increase in resolution and a 0.43 second reduction in time to first audio.

Pricing splits along the channel. Fin on text channels is USD 0.99 per outcome with a 50-outcome monthly minimum, and the pricing page defines a billable outcome precisely: a resolution, a procedure handoff or a disqualification at USD 0.99, and a qualification at USD 9.99, with no charge when a conversation is simply passed to a person. Fin Voice is stated to be on a custom plan and currently available to select customers working directly with sales.

Potential strengths

  • The billing rule is published in unusual detail, naming four billable outcome types and the rate for each on text channels
  • Fin runs with other helpdesks as well as Intercom, so a team on Salesforce or Zendesk is not forced to migrate

Trade-offs

  • Fin Voice is stated to be available to select customers only, so availability is a sales decision rather than a signup
  • The published USD 0.99 rate covers text outcomes, so it cannot be used to model the cost of a voice deployment
Sources and status
  • Product reference
  • Product documentation
  • Pricing source
  • Billing terms: Per billable outcome on text channels with a 50-outcome monthly minimum, plus optional per-seat helpdesk and add-on fees; Fin Voice quoted separately
  • Source review: checked Sep 23, 2026
  • Vendor confirmation: not confirmed

Regal

enterprise
regal.ai ↗
Consider forContact centres above roughly 25 agents and 100,000 monthly call minutes that run support alongside outbound calling, since Regal states that threshold itself
Pricing notesQuote-based. Regal states that pricing depends on factors specific to the team and requires contact, that a buyer pays for the features used, and that pricing is discounted as spend commitment and contract length rise. The pricing FAQ states that Regal works with enterprise companies and that a good proxy for fit is at least 25 agents and at least 100,000 call minutes a month. No rate is published (checked Sep 2026)
Feature to evaluateBranded caller ID and spam remediation alongside the agent, which protect answer rates on outbound support calls

Regal sells AI agents across phone, SMS, chat and WebRTC alongside a contact centre platform for human agents, and its customer support use case sits next to lead qualification, appointment setting, collections and bookings. The same journey builder, unified customer profile and conversation intelligence serve inbound support and outbound revenue contact.

Support capabilities named are tier-one automation, troubleshooting guidance, proactive outreach, feedback collection and replacement of an interactive voice response menu. Agents are stated to act independently through API calls, workflows and system integrations, with CRM data used for personalisation during the call. Compliance coverage listed includes SOC 2, HIPAA, GDPR, CCPA and TCPA.

Two capabilities are unusual on a support shortlist. Branded caller ID and spam remediation exist because an outbound support call that shows as a suspected spam number does not get answered. Pricing is quoted, but the FAQ carries the most actionable public statement on this page: a good proxy for fit is at least 25 agents and at least 100,000 call minutes a month.

Potential strengths

  • The published size threshold saves a small team a sales cycle, which no other vendor on this page offers
  • Branded caller ID and spam remediation address a problem specific to outbound support contact that agent vendors usually ignore

Trade-offs

  • The stated floor of about 25 agents and 100,000 minutes a month rules out most mid-market support teams
  • The platform's centre of gravity is revenue contact such as lead qualification and collections, with support as one use case among several
Sources and status

How to choose a vendor

Decide what a billable event is before the demo

An outcome meter and a minute meter reward opposite behaviour. Sierra states that an unresolved conversation in most cases carries no charge and that escalations usually cost nothing, which shifts containment risk to the vendor and makes the definition of a resolved outcome the main contract term. PolyAI states that ongoing use is priced per minute, so average handle time rather than containment drives the invoice. A buyer that has not agreed the counting rule has not agreed the price.

Frequently asked questions

How many of these platforms publish an actual price?

Two publish a figure, and only one of those covers voice. Yellow.ai publishes a Free plan including 500 chat sessions a month and USD 0.99 per resolution above it, though voice access on that tier is marked limited. Fin publishes USD 0.99 per outcome for its text channels with a 50-outcome monthly minimum, and states separately that Fin Voice is on a custom plan available to select customers. Sierra publishes its meter but no rate, PolyAI a per-minute structure but no rate, and the remaining six publish nothing.

What is the difference between outcome pricing and per-minute pricing for a support line?

They move in opposite directions. Under Sierra's published outcome model, an unresolved conversation in most cases produces no charge and an escalation usually produces none either, so the vendor carries containment risk and the definition of a resolution becomes the contract term that matters. Under PolyAI's per-minute structure, every connected minute bills regardless of the result, so a call that transfers quickly costs less than one the agent resolves slowly. A team that measures itself on containment should model both meters against the same month of call data before reading any feature comparison.

Which platforms state a minimum size or availability restriction?

Two state one publicly. Regal's pricing FAQ says it works with enterprise companies and gives a good proxy of at least 25 agents and at least 100,000 call minutes a month. Fin states that Fin Voice is currently available to select customers working directly with its sales team, so voice is not self-serve even though the text product is. The remaining eight publish no floor, but all of them route every enquiry through a demo, which serves the same qualification purpose without stating the threshold.

Which of these run voice, chat and email on one agent rather than separate products?

Decagon, Yellow.ai, Sierra, Replicant, boost.ai, Fin and Regal all describe multiple channels on one platform. Decagon states cross-channel memory so a caller who first used chat does not restate the problem. Sierra describes voice as one surface of an agent that also handles chat, SMS, messaging and email. boost.ai states that voice is built into the same platform as digital channels rather than bolted on. PolyAI, Parloa and Maven AGI are voice-led.

What should a regulated buyer check first?

Where the policy is enforced and which certifications are contracted. Replicant states that business rules and security policies are codified outside the model prompt and that supervisory agents audit each conversation turn. boost.ai describes a hybrid design that keeps deterministic control where it is critical and lists ISO 27001 and ISO 27701. Parloa lists ISO 27001:2022, SOC 2 Type 1 and Type 2, PCI DSS, HIPAA and DORA. In every case the certification is a published claim, and the audit report should be requested before it is relied on.

Do any of these publish uptime commitments?

PolyAI states a 99.9 percent uptime SLA on customer phone lines as included in every plan, alongside a 24/7/365 emergency support phone line. Replicant publishes two different figures on two pages, more than 99.95 percent on the platform page and more than 99.999 percent on the voice page, so the contracted number must be confirmed in writing. The other eight platforms do not publish an uptime figure on their public product pages, which means the SLA is part of the negotiated contract rather than a comparison point at shortlist stage.

How does the pricing on this page compare with a developer voice agent platform?

The platforms here are sold to support organisations and priced against support outcomes, minutes or resolutions. Developer-facing voice agent platforms are usually priced per minute of API usage and leave the workflow, escalation, quality assurance and reporting to the buyer. The comparison is therefore not like for like: a per-minute API rate covers the call, while the quoted prices here cover the call plus deployment, tuning, guardrails and analytics.

Is the order of this comparison a ranking?

No. Every entry carries a dated source check against the vendor's own public pages, so all ten sit in one group and appear in content sequence within it. StatWharf does not score, rank or name a winner in a category, and position on this page carries no judgement about product quality. Buyer fit in each row describes a use case supported by the vendor's published documentation, not an endorsement and not a claim of hands-on testing.

Suggest a vendor or correction

Send factual corrections to editorial@statwharf.com. Corrections are free. For inclusion or placement enquiries, contact partnerships.

Contact partnerships

First published September 2026. Page update dates reflect editorial changes, not a fresh check of every vendor.