BoostUp pricing, features and alternatives
BoostUp is worth buying when RevOps owns the forecast cadence and wants to configure the roll-up itself rather than wait on a vendor. BoostUp publishes no pricing: it rebranded as Terret on September 9, 2025, Terret quotes rather than lists, and our September 2026 check found no third-party figure we would rely on. The practical consequence is that you cannot shortlist it without holding a second quote beside it.
The short answer
Buy BoostUp if managers already submit a weekly number, your opportunity data is reasonably clean, and your ops team wants control over forecast logic and roll-ups without a services engagement for every change. It is the second serious option most buyers put next to Clari, which is the main reason it reaches shortlists at all.
Skip it if there is no forecast cadence today, because a tool does not create the habit, and a dashboard nobody opens on Monday costs the same as one that gets used. Skip it too if opportunity data is unreliable, or if what you want is call recording and coaching: that is Gong and a different business case.
Where BoostUp fits
BoostUp fits a mid-market or enterprise team where RevOps runs the forecast cadence and wants a dedicated tool rather than CRM reports. Forecast submission and deal inspection sit in the same product, so the weekly call and the deal review read from the same data instead of from two reconstructions of it. That is the whole proposition, and it only lands where the weekly call already exists as a real meeting with a real number attached.
The buyer is usually RevOps rather than the CRO, and that shapes what the evaluation should test. You are not judging whether the dashboards look good in a board deck. You are judging how much of the forecast logic your own team can configure, how much of the Monday call runs out of the tool instead of out of a spreadsheet, and whether the change history is auditable at quarter end when someone asks why the number moved. Rebuild your real forecast hierarchy in the pilot, including overlays and split territories, because those two are where generic roll-up models usually break.
The rebrand is a fact to get straight before you start a procurement process. BoostUp rebranded as Terret on September 9, 2025, according to its press release, and boostup.ai now serves Terret pages: Terret Nexus, Terret Forecast and Terret Conversation Intelligence. So the name on your contract, your security review and your invoice may not be the name on the shortlist your team wrote. Check which legal entity you are contracting with and which product names map to the modules you are buying, and do it early rather than during legal review.
CRM hygiene is a precondition rather than a project you run alongside. Deal-risk signals are computed from opportunity records, so weak stage definitions and stale close dates will undermine the risk views and, worse, make them confidently wrong. Ask what inputs drive each flag, then run the model against a closed quarter and compare its calls with what happened. Settle your forecast categories before anything is configured, or the roll-ups will faithfully reproduce habits you were trying to leave behind.
Independent review coverage of BoostUp is thin in our sources compared with Clari or Gong, which changes how you evaluate rather than whether. Weight references heavily and ask specifically for a customer who moved from Clari or who evaluated both, because that is the only reference that speaks to the decision in front of you. If the vendor cannot produce one, note that and price the risk rather than ignore it.
What BoostUp replaces cleanly: the forecast spreadsheet, the manual roll-up an analyst rebuilds every week, the separate deal-risk slide, and the argument at quarter end about what the number was three weeks ago. What it does not replace: the forecast habit, clean CRM data, or the judgment that decides what to do about a flagged deal. Our forecast call agenda is where the habit gets written down, and our forecast accuracy tracker is what tells you a year later whether the purchase moved anything.
BoostUp pricing
BoostUp, now Terret, does not publish prices. Our September 2026 check of boostup.ai found Terret product pages and a sales-led route to a quote, with no rate at any tier, and we found no attributed third-party price data for it that we would carry here as a benchmark. That means there is no anchor at all: not a list price, not a buyer median. The only way to price it is to hold two competing proposals at the same seat count and the same module list, which is a reason to start the Clari and Aviso conversations on the same day rather than in sequence.
Five things drive the number that comes back, and the AI agent layer is the newest of them.
- The seat count, and how seats are tiered. Ask specifically whether a viewer costs less than a forecast owner, because on a leadership-heavy deployment where ten managers submit and forty people read, that single answer moves the total more than a discount will.
- Which modules are bundled and which are separate. Forecast, conversation intelligence and the AI agent layer added at the rebrand are distinct pieces, so ask for a price per seat per module and find out which one a demo was showing you.
- The AI agent layer itself, which arrived with the Terret rebrand and is a new line item rather than an included upgrade. Ask whether it is priced per seat, per usage or as a platform fee, since all three appear in this category.
- The term, and any minimum seat commitment, which together decide whether you can shrink the deployment if headcount falls mid-contract.
- The renewal uplift. BoostUp's own evaluation material tells buyers to ask what uplift applies, which is a fair signal that it is worth capping in the first contract rather than discussing at the first renewal.
BoostUp pricing is a negotiation with no public anchor, so the structure of the ask is your only lever. Get the module list priced separately, viewer seats priced against forecast-owner seats, the AI agent layer as its own line, the minimum commitment, the term and a capped renewal uplift. Then ask what happens to your forecast history and snapshots if you do not renew, because a record of how your number moved is either an asset or a switching cost depending on whether you can export it. Our sales forecasting software RFP puts BoostUp, Clari and Aviso on identical terms, and how we review software explains why a quote-only vendor gets no price table here.
What BoostUp gives up
You give up any way to budget before a sales call. Nothing is published, no buyer benchmark exists that we would stand behind, and the module mix is negotiated rather than listed. Hold two quotes at once, make every vendor break out seats, modules and the agent layer separately, and treat the first proposal as an opening position rather than a price.
You give up the weight of a thick reviewer record. There is less third-party review material for BoostUp than for Clari or Gong, so peer references and your own pilot results carry more of the decision than they would elsewhere. That is a real cost: it means more of your evaluation time goes into reference calls, and it means a surprise in month four has less published precedent to warn you about.
You give up a clean brand identity through procurement. The BoostUp to Terret rebrand means product names, documentation and the contracting entity may not match the name your team has been using in meetings. Expect to explain that to legal and to security review, and confirm which named modules correspond to the capabilities you were shown.
You give up output quality if your CRM is weak, and the failure is quiet rather than loud. Like every forecasting tool, BoostUp inherits your stage definitions and close-date discipline, and a risk flag built on stale data still renders as a confident colour. Blank three fields on a test opportunity and watch what the flag does. Agree your pipeline coverage thresholds first so there is something to check the output against.
You give up the habit itself, which no vendor sells. BoostUp puts the submission workflow and the deal review in one place; a manager still has to open it, defend a number and change something as a result. Where that meeting does not exist, the purchase buys a better-looking version of the problem. Commit named managers to a named cadence before signing, not after.
How BoostUp compares
Every option below quotes rather than publishes, which is the standing condition of this category and the reason most of the work here is procurement rather than feature comparison. The split that decides the shortlist is what the tool is for. BoostUp and Clari compete directly on forecast workflow with deal inspection attached, and the difference tends to show up in how much RevOps can configure without services help. Aviso competes on prediction accuracy as the headline. People.ai competes one layer down, on capturing the activity data that every forecast model then reads. Gong competes when the recorded conversation, rather than the opportunity record, is the evidence you want in the review. The price column says custom quote because that is the truth for all five, and an invented figure would be worse than a blank.
| Tool | Best for | Price | Where it breaks |
|---|---|---|---|
| BoostUp | RevOps teams that want to own forecast logic and roll-up configuration | Custom quote; now sold as Terret | Thin independent review coverage, and the rebrand means names on the contract may not match the shortlist |
| Clari | Forecast discipline and pipeline inspection as the primary job | Custom quote; no published rate | Quote-only, and it needs clean opportunity data before any forecast output is worth reading |
| Aviso | Sales orgs that want an AI prediction to challenge the submitted forecast | Custom quote; priced on users and modules | Reviewers report bugs that create manual work, and training is needed before managers use it fully |
| People.ai | Capturing rep activity into the CRM so forecast models have something to read | Custom quote; no published rate | It feeds the forecast rather than running it, so it is usually a second purchase and not a substitute |
| Gong | Deal reviews where the recorded conversation is the evidence | Custom quote; per-user licenses plus a platform fee | A coaching product before a forecasting one, and the platform fee does not scale down |
What to test in a BoostUp pilot
Our sources do not confirm a free trial, so ask for a pilot on your own CRM data and scope it yourself. Run it against one real forecast quarter rather than a sandbox, and design every step to produce a number or a written answer you can put in a procurement document. If Clari is also on the shortlist, run the same forecast week through both.
- Rebuild your real forecast hierarchy, including overlays and split territories, and record who had to do it and how long it took. If the vendor's services team did the build, every future reorganization goes the same route.
- Have managers submit and adjust a real weekly call in the tool, then check at quarter end whether the history of changes is easy to audit. That audit trail is one of the main reasons to buy a dedicated tool over CRM reports.
- Ask which inputs drive each deal-risk flag, then run the model against a closed quarter and compare its calls with what happened. A model that cannot retro-fit your history will not predict your future.
- Blank the close date, stage and amount on a test opportunity and watch what the risk flag does. If it still shows a confident answer, you have learned how much to trust it on a pipeline with real gaps.
- Check sync behaviour under stress: how often opportunity changes are pulled, how custom fields are handled, and what a manager sees on screen when a sync fails mid-call. Forecast tools live or die on this.
- Ask to speak to a customer who moved from Clari to BoostUp or who evaluated both, and ask them what they would configure differently. With thin public review coverage, that one conversation is worth more than a feature grid.
- Get the commercial answers in writing during the pilot: which modules are bundled, whether viewer seats cost less than forecast owners, how the AI agent layer is priced, the minimum commitment, the term, the renewal cap, and your export rights on forecast history.
BoostUp questions buyers ask
What does BoostUp do?
BoostUp is a revenue intelligence and forecasting platform. RevOps teams use it to run the forecast submission process and inspect deal risk in one place, so the weekly call and the deal review read from the same data.
Is BoostUp now called Terret?
Yes. BoostUp rebranded as Terret on September 9, 2025, according to its press release, and boostup.ai now serves Terret pages including Terret Nexus, Terret Forecast and Terret Conversation Intelligence. Check which entity and product names appear on your contract.
How much does BoostUp cost?
BoostUp, now named Terret, does not publish pricing, and we found no third-party figures we would rely on. The quote depends on seats, modules and term. Compare it with other forecasting quotes on an identical seat and module mix.
Is BoostUp a Clari alternative?
Yes, that is one of the most common reasons buyers shortlist it. Both cover forecasting and pipeline inspection, so the choice usually comes down to configurability, price and pilot results. Ask for a reference who evaluated both.
Can RevOps configure BoostUp's forecast hierarchy without the vendor?
Self-configuration is the main pitch to ops leaders, but our sources do not confirm the limits. Rebuild your real hierarchy in the pilot, including overlays and split territories, and record who did the work. That answer predicts every future change.
Does BoostUp include conversation intelligence?
A conversation intelligence module exists, sold under the Terret name alongside Forecast and the AI agent layer. Treat it as a separate line item rather than an included feature, and ask for a price per seat per module before you compare totals.
Who is BoostUp best for?
RevOps-led organizations with an existing weekly forecast cadence and reasonably clean opportunity data. It is a poor fit where no forecast habit exists, since the tool supplies the workflow and not the discipline behind it.
Is there a free trial for BoostUp?
Our sources do not confirm a free trial. Ask BoostUp about a pilot on your own CRM data before signing, and scope it against one real forecast quarter so you can test the risk signals against outcomes you already know.
Does BoostUp work if our CRM data is messy?
Not well. Deal-risk signals are computed from opportunity records, so weak stage definitions and stale close dates produce confident output built on nothing. Fix stage definitions and close-date discipline first, then buy the model.