Skip to content
InSearch
How it works
Enterprise search software ChatGPT Enterprise pricing Coveo vs Lucidworks Dust vs GoSearch Dashworks alternatives Glean pricing Glean alternatives Microsoft Copilot alternatives Dropbox Dash pricing Coveo alternatives Amazon Quick Suite pricing Amazon Q pricing Gemini Enterprise pricing Copilot pricing Slack enterprise search Enterprise search use cases Enterprise search tools AI work assistant Knowledge base search AI enterprise search Internal company search engine 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 Intranet search See all →
GoSearch alternative Dust alternative Guru alternative Amazon Kendra alternative Lucidworks alternative Moveworks alternative Sinequa alternative Atlassian Rovo alternative Hebbia alternative Onyx alternative Bloomfire alternative Amazon Q Business alternative Gemini Enterprise alternative Google Agentspace alternative ServiceNow Otto alternative Copilot Studio alternative SharePoint agents alternative
Security Pricing Blog Contact

Compare · Lucidworks

Lucidworks alternative: cross-app workplace search with cited, permission-aware answers

Lucidworks is a genuinely powerful platform and it deserves a fair hearing. It was founded in 2007 by the people who built Apache Solr, it indexes billions of documents at companies like Reddit, Morgan Stanley and the US Census Bureau, and it does the two things that matter most here properly: it returns cited answers grounded in your documents, and its Graph Security Trimming applies item-level access controls at query time. It also does things we do not: self-hosted, on-premises, hybrid and OpenShift deployment, bring your own model, and deep commerce merchandising. If you need any of that, buy Lucidworks.

or see the comparison ↓

One search · cited answers · permission-aware

Answer Console
Demo · sample data
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

Interactive demo · sample data, no app connected

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

The honest issue for workplace search is where the product's center of gravity has moved. Every shipping AI agent in the Lucidworks lineup is commerce-oriented, from Guided Selling to Merchandiser Insights, and the homepage sells search that brings your revenue with it. Meanwhile the connectors a workplace search buyer depends on are being wound down: Lucidworks deprecated all V1 connectors in Fusion 5.18 for removal in Fusion 6, which covers Confluence, Jira, Google Drive, Salesforce, ServiceNow and Dropbox. Confluence and Jira are being replaced by community REST recipes, and Google Drive's replacement is described as a future V2 connector. There is no Notion connector, no Gmail connector and no Teams connector at all.

The other issue is what you operate. Self-hosted Fusion is a Kubernetes distribution running Solr, Spark and ZooKeeper that somebody on your team owns, and Solr platform engineers are a real and expensive hire. InSearch is the other end of that trade. It connects Google Drive, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Gmail, Jira and Salesforce, returns a written answer with inline citations, and enforces item-level permissions at query time. There is no cluster, no relevance tuning and no pricing conversation: it is per seat, published, and you sign up without booking a demo.

Lucidworks Fusion sits on Solr, so a fair comparison is really platform-versus-product, the framing in open-source enterprise search, self-host or buy. Buyers here also evaluate Coveo and Sinequa from the same generation of relevance engines.

Lucidworks is a powerful Solr-based platform whose investment has moved toward ecommerce product discovery. It genuinely does cited answers and permission-aware search, and it wins on scale, openness and deployment flexibility. For cross-app workplace search it is a build. InSearch is the buy.

Side by side

Lucidworks vs InSearch, honestly

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

What matters InSearch Lucidworks
What you operate Nothing; connect your apps and search Self-hosted Fusion is a Kubernetes distribution running Solr, Spark and ZooKeeper that your team runs; the hosted option is Google Cloud only
Who it is built for now Workplace search only, and staying there Dual track, but every shipping AI agent is commerce-oriented: Guided Selling, Merchandiser Insights, product Q&A
Modern SaaS connectors Drive, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Gmail, Jira and Salesforce out of the box Slack, SharePoint, OneDrive and Box are current V2; no Notion, Gmail or Teams connector exists
Connector roadmap Actively maintained, nothing deprecated All V1 connectors deprecated in Fusion 5.18 for removal in Fusion 6, including Confluence, Jira, Google Drive, Salesforce and ServiceNow
Cited answers Written answer with inline citations to the exact source docs Yes; the RAG endpoint grounds answers and returns sources
Permission-aware Item-level permissions inherited and enforced at query time Yes, and mature: Graph Security Trimming applies access controls at query time
Deployment options Cloud only Genuine strength: self-hosted, on-premises, hybrid, multi-cloud and OpenShift
Model choice Managed for you, nothing to choose Genuine strength: bring your own model, openly tunable rather than a closed box
Scale heritage Built for company knowledge, not catalogs Genuine strength: Solr founders, billions of documents, tens of millions of SKUs
Pricing Transparent per seat, published on the site No published pricing and no pricing page; contact sales only
How you are metered Per seat, so cost tracks the people using it Workplace Fusion is priced by records indexed, so cost tracks your document count; overages carry a minimum 25% surcharge per its EULA
Trying it Sign up without booking a demo No free or self-serve tier since 2019; evaluation trials are sales-gated
Best suited for Teams that want cited cross-app answers without running a search platform Ecommerce product discovery at scale, or teams with Solr engineers who want to build and control everything

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

A product, not a platform to run

Fusion is Solr, Spark, ZooKeeper and Kubernetes that somebody owns, upgraded every couple of months. InSearch is a search box that works on the apps you already use.

The connectors you actually need, maintained

Lucidworks has no Notion, Gmail or Teams connector, and its Confluence, Jira and Google Drive connectors are deprecated for removal in Fusion 6. Ours are the product.

Priced in public

Lucidworks has never published a pricing page. Ours is on the site, per seat, and you can start without talking to anyone.

Good questions

Lucidworks vs InSearch, answered

Not exactly. Lucidworks is built on Apache Solr, and Fusion 5.18 ships Solr 9.6.1 alongside Apache Spark and ZooKeeper, but Lucidworks is the commercial platform around Solr rather than Solr itself. The company was founded in 2007 by people who built Solr, including its creator Yonik Seeley, and remains its principal commercial steward. Practically: you get Solr plus connectors, pipelines, signals and a UI, and you also get Solr's operational reality.
Lucidworks has never published a dollar figure, so there is no list price to quote. What is documented is the model, and it matters: workplace Fusion is priced by records indexed, commerce Fusion by requests per year, both against a contract year with a maximum queries-per-second cap, and its EULA sets a minimum 25% surcharge on overages. So your cost tracks document count and query volume rather than headcount, which is a very different shape from per-seat. There is no free or self-serve tier; trials are sales-gated. Treat any specific Lucidworks price on a third-party site with suspicion, because several widely-repeated figures trace to AI-generated pages rather than to Lucidworks.
Two things. Its commercial center of gravity is ecommerce product discovery: search, browse, recommendations and merchandising for retailers, where it was named a Leader in the 2024 Gartner Magic Quadrant for Search and Product Discovery. It also sells workplace and knowledge search for employees, connecting sources like SharePoint, Confluence and network drives, and IDC named it a Leader in knowledge discovery in December 2025. The product investment visibly favors the commerce side.
No. None of those three has a Lucidworks connector. Its connector library is strong on classic enterprise content, including SharePoint, network shares, Box, OneDrive and Slack, which reflects its enterprise search heritage. It is worth checking the current status of Confluence, Jira, Google Drive and Salesforce too: those V1 connectors are deprecated as of Fusion 5.18 and are scheduled for removal in Fusion 6, with Confluence and Jira pointed at community-maintained REST recipes.
It depends which half of Lucidworks you were buying. For ecommerce product discovery, look at Algolia, Bloomreach, Constructor or Coveo, and honestly, look hard at staying with Lucidworks, because it is very good at that. For cross-app workplace search where you want employees getting cited, permission-aware answers across Drive, Slack, Notion, Confluence, Gmail, Jira and Salesforce without running Kubernetes or hiring Solr engineers, InSearch is the closer fit.

More comparisons

See how InSearch compares

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 Amazon Kendra

Amazon Kendra alternative

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

 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.

 vs Amazon Q Business

Amazon Q Business alternative

Still open to new customers, and permission-aware by default.

 vs Gemini Enterprise

Gemini Enterprise alternative

Cross-app cited answers without a Google Cloud project to run.

 vs Google Agentspace

Google Agentspace alternative

Agentspace became Gemini Enterprise. Here is what that means for buyers.

 vs ServiceNow Otto

ServiceNow Otto alternative

Otto absorbed Now Assist and Moveworks. Here is the focused option.

 vs Microsoft Copilot Studio

Copilot Studio alternative

Build an agent, or just get the answer.

 vs SharePoint agents

SharePoint agents alternative

Twenty sources is a site bot. Company search is a different job.
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