Attio vs Affinity

Attio vs Affinity

Last updated 3 August 2026 · Nacho Lafuente, Attio Certified Partner

Affinity now publishes list pricing, which it did not do for most of its history. As of 3 August 2026 the tiers are Essential at $2,000 per user per year, Scale at $2,300, Advanced at $2,700, and Enterprise on a custom quote. Every tier still routes through "Contact sales" (there is no self-serve checkout), but you can now put a number in a budget line before you book a demo. That is a genuine improvement, and it makes the comparison below far easier to run honestly. Every figure on this page now comes from Affinity's own pricing page rather than the second-hand G2 and Capterra estimates the market ran on for years. Those estimates were high. A 10-seat fund is $20,000 a year on Essential and $27,000 on Advanced at list, before any negotiated discount. Attio is $29/user/month billed annually, published, with no minimum seat count and no sales call required. That puts a 10-seat fund at $3,480 a year, roughly a sixth of Affinity Essential. Even Attio's Pro plan at $69/user/month lands at $8,280, under half of Affinity's entry tier. Beyond pricing: Affinity is the incumbent VC CRM, used by 45% of top-100 funds per their site, and the gold standard for automatic relationship scoring and intro-path finding. It has also moved fast on AI, with Notetaker, AI Chat, its Ascend agent platform, and a hosted MCP server all included from the Scale tier up. Attio is the modern challenger: a custom-objects-first CRM that models fund structures, LP commitments, and deal flow at a fraction of the seat cost. If you're comparing them, the question is whether Affinity's relationship and AI layer is worth roughly 6x the per-seat cost. For funds whose deal sourcing already runs through known channels, the answer is often no. For funds whose advantage is intro-path discovery, the answer is often yes. Below: how the two compare on the things that actually matter for fund ops, when Affinity wins, and the migration playbook we run for funds switching.

Attio vs Affinity, side by side

The features that actually drive switching decisions, compared honestly.

FeatureAttioAffinityDealCloud4DegreesHubSpot
Annual cost (10 users) $3,480$20,000-$27,000Custom (six figures)~$12,000~$5,400
List price per user/year $348$2,000-$2,700Not published~$1,200Varies by contacts
Pricing transparency Public, self-servePublic list, sales-gatedCustom quoteCustom quotePublic, free tier
Relationship AI NoYes (best-in-class)SomeYesNo
Custom objects All plansNoLimitedLimitedPaid
LP management ConfigurableBasicBuilt-inBasicConfigurable
Deal flow tracking YesYesYesYesYes
Setup time 2 weeks2-4 weeks4-8 weeks2-4 weeks2-4 weeks
Best for Flexible fundsIntro-driven VCPE/CreditVCHybrid needs

Why funds move from Affinity to Attio

Seat cost at fund scale

Affinity's published list price is $2,000 per user per year on Essential, $2,300 on Scale, and $2,700 on Advanced. A 10-seat fund is $20,000 to $27,000 a year before negotiation; a 20-seat fund is $40,000 to $54,000. Attio is $348 per user per year on the same annual billing. The gap is roughly 6x per seat, and it widens every time the fund adds an analyst. Most funds we talk to are not disputing that Affinity is good software, they are asking whether the relationship layer earns a 6x multiple on every headcount they add.

Relationship intelligence overkill

Affinity's core value is automatic relationship scoring and intro path finding. But if your fund already knows who knows whom, you're paying for features you don't use. The value prop only works if you actively leverage the AI, and most funds we talk to don't track that rigorously.

Customization limits

Affinity is built for their specific workflow. If your fund has unique processes (co-invest tracking, LP management, custom deal stages) you'll hit walls. It's opinionated software designed around one way of doing venture.

No custom objects

Affinity's data model is fixed: companies, people, and opportunities. Funds that grow beyond deal and company tracking hit a hard wall because there's no native way to model LPs as first-class objects, track co-investors across multiple funds, or manage portfolio KPIs in the same system. Attio's custom objects let you build exactly the data model your fund operates on (LPs, co-investors, portfolio milestones, IR contacts) without workarounds or separate spreadsheets.

Ecosystem lock-in

Affinity works best in Affinity. The integrations exist but it's not an open platform. If you need deep connections to other tools, you'll feel constrained.

Other CRMs in this category

If neither Attio nor Affinity is the right fit, here are the other options worth knowing.

Attio

From $29/user/month billed annually

Flexible CRM that can model fund structures, LP relationships, and deal flow. Roughly a sixth of Affinity's per-seat cost, with more customization power.

Best for: VCs and PE firms who want flexibility over AI features. Funds with unique workflows or tight budgets.

Pros

  • Custom objects for any data model
  • Roughly a sixth of Affinity's per-seat price
  • Modern, fast interface
  • Strong API for integrations

Cons

  • No automatic relationship scoring
  • No intro path finding
  • Manual relationship tracking

Salesforce + Navatar

From $150/user/month combined

Enterprise CRM with PE/VC overlay. Maximum flexibility but requires significant setup.

Best for: Large funds (50+ people) needing enterprise compliance. Firms with existing Salesforce expertise.

Pros

  • Infinite customization
  • Enterprise compliance
  • Huge ecosystem
  • Industry-specific overlays

Cons

  • Complex implementation
  • Needs dedicated admin
  • High total cost

DealCloud

Custom quote only

Purpose-built for private capital. Deal management, fundraising, and investor relations in one platform.

Best for: PE and credit funds with complex deal structures. Firms needing integrated fundraising tools.

Pros

  • Built for private capital
  • Strong deal management
  • Good fundraising tools
  • Industry expertise

Cons

  • Not cheap
  • Less modern UX
  • Can be complex

4Degrees

From $100/user/month, about $1,200/user/year against Affinity Essential at $2,000

Relationship intelligence CRM similar to Affinity but more affordable. Good middle ground.

Best for: Funds wanting relationship intelligence without Affinity pricing. Good for smaller VC teams.

Pros

  • Relationship intelligence
  • Roughly 40% cheaper per seat than Affinity
  • Good for deal sourcing
  • Cleaner than Salesforce

Cons

  • Smaller company
  • Less polished than Affinity
  • Limited customization

HubSpot CRM

Free tier available

Full platform that can be configured for investor workflows. Not purpose-built but highly capable.

Best for: Funds with portfolio company marketing needs. Accelerators or studios with operational focus.

Pros

  • Great value for money
  • Strong ecosystem
  • Marketing tools included
  • Proven platform

Cons

  • Not investor-specific
  • Requires configuration
  • Contact-based pricing

Why we recommend Attio for most Affinity alternatives

If relationship AI isn't your primary value driver, Attio gives you more flexibility at roughly a sixth of the per-seat cost, and a data model that actually matches how funds operate:

  • Custom objects for funds, LPs, portfolio companies, co-investors - model your actual workflow
  • $3,480/year for 10 seats vs $20,000 on Affinity Essential - the difference covers an analyst's tooling budget several times over
  • Public pricing you can self-serve, no sales call required to see or buy it
  • Modern interface your team will actually use
  • Fast setup - productive in weeks, not months

From the blog

All guides →
Attio

Attio CRM reports that actually matter

The 8 reports we configure in every Attio workspace and why most teams are tracking the wrong metrics.

 Attio

How to migrate to Attio: 5-step playbook

The exact 5-step process we use to move teams from HubSpot, Salesforce, and Pipedrive to Attio without data loss or downtime.

 GTM Stack

The B2B GTM stack for 2026: Attio, Clay, n8n, HeyReach

A practitioner's guide to the modern B2B GTM stack: how Attio, Clay, n8n, and HeyReach work together as a system, not a collection of tools.

FAQ

Affinity publishes list pricing on its site. As of 3 August 2026: Essential is $2,000 per user per year, Scale is $2,300, Advanced is $2,700, and Enterprise is a custom quote. All four tiers are billed annually and all four route through "Contact sales" rather than a self-serve checkout. Scale adds Notetaker, AI Chat, the Ascend agent platform, and a hosted MCP server. Advanced adds PitchBook, Dealroom, and Crunchbase enrichment plus packaged Slack, Salesforce, and Box integrations. Scale and Advanced cap API access at 100,000 calls a month; Enterprise removes the cap. Collaborator seats and headless sync-only seats are add-ons from Scale up.

At list price, $20,000 a year on Essential, $23,000 on Scale, and $27,000 on Advanced. Add-on collaborator or sync-only seats sit on top of that, and Enterprise is quoted per firm. For comparison, the same 10 seats on Attio cost $3,480 a year on the Plus plan or $8,280 on Pro, both billed annually. Affinity negotiates like any annual-contract vendor, so treat the list price as the ceiling for a multi-seat commitment, not the final number.

Depends on your sourcing model. If you rely heavily on warm intros and network-driven deal flow, the intro path finding and relationship scoring can genuinely surface opportunities. If most deals come through known channels or intermediaries, you're paying for features you won't use.

Yes. The raw relationship data (interactions, meeting notes, email threads) can be exported from Affinity and imported to Attio. What you lose is Affinity's AI-generated relationship scores and the automated strength calculations. Those are proprietary to Affinity's model and don't transfer. Your actual contact history, deal notes, and company data move cleanly. We run this migration regularly and can do it without losing any human-entered context.

Not natively. Attio tracks who introduced whom, interaction history, and relationship context, but you'll record that manually rather than having AI score it automatically. For many funds, this is sufficient: the contacts and their history are in the system, and analysts know the network well enough that automated scoring doesn't add decision value. If intro-path discovery from cold contacts is a core sourcing method, Affinity or 4Degrees are better fits.

Yes, but manually. You can track who introduced whom, relationship strength, and interaction history - but you'll enter it yourself rather than having AI score it automatically. For many funds, this manual approach is sufficient.

Most funds we work with run a simple test: look at your last 10 funded deals and count how many came from intros surfaced by Affinity's AI vs. known channels. If it's less than 20%, the relationship intelligence is unlikely to justify roughly 6x the per-seat cost.

Yes, if: relationship intelligence actively drives your deal sourcing, you have budget for premium tooling, and your team uses the AI features daily. Affinity's relationship scoring is genuinely best-in-class - the question is whether your fund leverages it.

Choose Affinity if intro-path discovery is a primary sourcing lever and your fund actively uses relationship scoring to surface opportunities. Choose Attio if you want a flexible data model for deal flow, LP tracking, and portfolio management at roughly a sixth of the per-seat cost. Most funds we work with land on Attio: they get the structure they need, the team actually uses it, and the savings are material. The minority who stay on Affinity are funds where warm intros from cold contacts (surfaced by AI) are measurably driving deal sourcing.

Related guides

Thinking about moving off Affinity?

We migrate teams from Affinity to Attio regularly. 30-min call, zero pressure, honest recommendation.

Let's chat

Setting it up yourself? Start on Attio and get 10% off your first year .

Book a Discovery Session