InSearch
How it works
Enterprise search software AI work assistant Knowledge base search AI enterprise search Internal knowledge search Workplace search Search all company apps AI knowledge assistant Unified search Search Slack & Drive AI assistant for work Knowledge management RAG for enterprise Cited AI answers Confluence search Notion search AI for support agents Sales enablement search Engineering search HR knowledge assistant Permission-aware search Secure AI search Onboarding knowledge SharePoint search See all →
Glean alternative GoSearch alternative Dust alternative Guru alternative Coveo alternative Microsoft Copilot alternative Amazon Kendra alternative Lucidworks alternative Moveworks alternative Sinequa alternative Atlassian Rovo alternative Glean pricing Hebbia alternative Onyx alternative Bloomfire alternative
Security Pricing Blog

Compare · Glean

Glean pricing: what it costs, what buyers report, and how to compare it

The honest starting point is that Glean does not publish public pricing. There is no pricing page with a number on it, so every figure you find online, including the ones below, comes from buyers, procurement data and analyst reports rather than from Glean. Treat all of it as a range to negotiate against, not a quote.

or see the comparison ↓

One search · cited answers · permission-aware

Answer Console
Permission-aware · no PII
Try
Sources

Ask your company anything

InSearch searches across Drive, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Gmail, Jira and Salesforce in one query and returns a written answer with citations, only ever from sources you're allowed to see.

Drive Slack Notion Confluence Gmail Jira Salesforce
↓ one clear, cited answer

Searching connected apps

Working

Answer

Only sources you have access to
Sources

Live, interactive · cited answers

Every answer cited to its source documents · permission-aware · never trains on your data

What buyers consistently report is a per-seat annual contract in the tens of dollars per user per month, sales-quoted and negotiated by deal size, with a seat minimum that puts the entry point well into five figures a year. Advanced AI and agent usage is commonly reported as billed on top of the base seat, rather than included in it. The three things worth pinning down in writing before you sign are the seat minimum, what counts as an add-on, and whether support is a mandatory percentage of contract value.

InSearch exists at the other end of that spectrum. Same core job, cross-app search with cited, permission-aware answers, but priced transparently per seat with no hard hundred-seat minimum, so you can start small and grow into it instead of committing to an enterprise contract to find out whether it works for you.

Glean does not publish pricing, so the only honest answer is a reported range, not a number. What is clear from buyers is a sales-quoted per-seat annual contract with a seat minimum and add-ons on top. InSearch does the same core job on transparent per-seat pricing with no hard seat minimum.

Side by side

Glean vs InSearch, honestly

A fair look at what each does well. Both are capable tools. Here is where they differ.

What matters InSearch Glean
Published pricing Yes, transparent per-seat pricing you can read before you talk to anyone No public pricing; every price is sales-quoted
Reported price point See the pricing page for the current per-seat rate Buyers and analysts commonly report tens of dollars per user per month, varying with deal size
Seat minimum No hard seat minimum; start with the team that needs it Reported minimums typically in the 50 to 100 seat range
Contract Per seat, no enterprise commitment required to start Annual enterprise contracts, negotiated
AI and agent usage Cited answers are the product, not a metered add-on Advanced AI and agent usage commonly reported as billed separately from the base seat
Core capability Cross-app search, cited answers, item-level permissions at query time Cross-app search, AI assistant, permission-aware, the category leader
Best suited for Teams that want to start now and see value before committing Large enterprises running a full procurement and guided rollout

Comparison reflects general, publicly understood positioning. Capabilities change, so check each product for the latest.

Why teams pick InSearch

One cited, permission-aware search across every app

No number, by design

Sales-gated pricing means the price depends on your deal size and your negotiation. That is normal for enterprise software, and it is also why comparison is hard.

Check the add-ons

The base seat is rarely the whole bill. Ask what advanced AI, agent usage and support cost on top, and get the seat minimum in writing.

A transparent comparison

InSearch publishes its per-seat price and has no hard seat minimum, so you can size the cost before you ever book a call.

Good questions

Glean vs InSearch, answered

Glean does not publish pricing, so there is no official number. Buyers and analyst sources commonly report a sales-quoted annual contract in the tens of dollars per user per month, with the exact rate depending on deal size and negotiation. Advanced AI and agent usage is generally reported as an additional cost on top of the base seat.
Reported minimums generally fall in the 50 to 100 seat range, which puts the practical entry point into five figures per year. Glean does not publish this, so confirm the minimum in writing during procurement. InSearch has no hard seat minimum, so a single team can start without a company-wide commitment.
Sales-gated pricing is standard for enterprise software sold through a guided procurement process, because the price varies with seat count, term and negotiation. It is not a criticism of the product, but it does mean you cannot compare cost without entering a sales cycle first.
InSearch does the same core job, one search across Drive, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Gmail, Jira and Salesforce returning a cited, permission-aware answer, on transparent per-seat pricing with no hard seat minimum. Whether it is cheaper for you depends on your seat count, which is exactly the comparison published pricing lets you make up front.

More comparisons

See how InSearch compares

vs Glean

Glean alternative

The same cited, permission-aware search, easier to start.

 vs GoSearch

GoSearch alternative

Cited, permission-aware answers across every app.

 vs Dust

Dust alternative

Search-first, with cited answers out of the box.

 vs Guru

Guru alternative

Live search across every app, not just a curated wiki.

 vs Coveo

Coveo alternative

Cited answers and an easy start, not a platform build.

 vs Microsoft Copilot

Microsoft Copilot alternative

Neutral search across every app, not just Microsoft 365.

 vs Amazon Kendra

Amazon Kendra alternative

Kendra is in maintenance mode. Here is where to land.

 vs Lucidworks

Lucidworks alternative

Workplace search without a Kubernetes cluster to run.

 vs Moveworks

Moveworks alternative

Now a ServiceNow product. Here is the independent option.

 vs Sinequa

Sinequa alternative

Built for the modern SaaS stack, not a two-year rollout.

 vs Atlassian Rovo

Atlassian Rovo alternative

For companies that are not only an Atlassian shop.

 vs Hebbia

Hebbia alternative

Company-wide cited search, not finance-desk document diligence.

 vs Onyx

Onyx alternative

The same cited, permission-aware answers, fully managed and no-ops.

 vs Bloomfire

Bloomfire alternative

Search where work already lives, instead of curating a knowledge base.
See every use case

Find any answer at work with InSearch

One search across all your company apps, a clear cited answer, scoped to exactly what each person can see, and never trained on your data.

See pricing

One search across every app · cited answers · permission-aware · never trains on your data