Default pricing, features and alternatives

The short answer

Buy Default if you get steady inbound demo requests, run Salesforce or HubSpot, and want forms, enrichment, qualification, routing and scheduling in one flow that RevOps can change without engineering help. It publishes rates rather than quoting them, which makes the business case easier to build, though our figures for it are unverified and need confirming against the vendor's page.

Skip it if most of your pipeline is outbound, because the platform fee starts at a listed $15,000 a year before a single rep seat and low inbound volume cannot carry that. Skip it too if all you need is a scheduling link: per-seat schedulers such as RevenueHero list a Lite tier at $15 per user per month, which is a different order of commitment.

Where Default fits

Default fits a B2B company with real inbound demand, on Salesforce or HubSpot, where RevOps wants one place to own enrichment, qualification and routing logic instead of rules scattered across the CRM, marketing automation and a scheduling tool. The problem it targets is specific and familiar: forms that dump leads into a queue, routing rules spread across three systems, and prospects who wait days for a reply they expected in minutes.

Fit is decided by inbound volume rather than by headcount, which is unusual enough to change who should be in the room. Most routing and scheduling tools get cheaper as you shrink; Default's platform fee does not, and seats sit on top of it. If you cannot count a steady stream of demo requests, the platform fee has nothing to amortize against, and the vendor's own positioning admits as much by pitching itself against a stack of tools rather than against a cheaper single tool.

The CRM dependency is where most of the implementation risk lives. Routing assigns inbound leads in real time on your rules, by territory, segment or account ownership, and the step that goes wrong is matching a lead to an existing account and owner in Salesforce or HubSpot. That is where routing errors come from in every product in this category. Ask how the matching works, then test it on your messiest records, and agree your lead routing rules on paper before anybody configures them in a tool.

Scope has grown, and that cuts both ways. Default started around forms, enrichment, routing and scheduling and has added workflows, website de-anonymization, intent signals and CRM hygiene, pitching itself as a replacement for Chili Piper, LeanData and Calendly. If it genuinely replaces a scheduler, a separate router and some of your enrichment spend, write down what you pay for those today, because that total is the only honest baseline for the platform fee. If it replaces one of the three, the arithmetic looks different.

Usage caps are the second budget variable and they are easy to miss. Growth includes 24,000 enrichment credits and 200,000 workflow runs a year; Scale includes 60,000 credits and 600,000 runs, plus a named support contact, migration services and custom integrations. Estimate your annual form volume and your workflow fan-out before you pick a tier, because a single large campaign is enough to push a team from one to the other, and the gap between the two listed prices is $21,000 a year.

Where it does not fit is reasonably clear. If website chat and conversational marketing are your main entry point, the comparison is forms-first against chat-first, which our Default against Qualified comparison covers. If you are an enterprise with complex Salesforce routing graphs and a Salesforce-centric stack, LeanData is the incumbent answer. Default sits in our revenue operations software directory and in the narrower lead routing software guide, and it is worth settling your marketing qualified lead definition before you configure any of it.

Default pricing

Default publishes its rates, which is the exception in this category and genuinely useful. One caveat belongs at the front of this section: the figures below came from the vendor's own pricing page when we last read it, and we have not independently verified them, so treat them as a guide to the shape of the deal rather than as a quote. Confirm every number against Default's current page before procurement. The shape is a platform fee billed annually, with rep seats added on top and usage capped per tier.

Listed plans and what each includes

Growth

Listed at $15,000 a year, or $1,250 a month, billed annually. Includes 24,000 enrichment credits and 200,000 workflow runs a year, with shared Slack support.

Scale

Listed at $36,000 a year, or $3,000 a month. Includes 60,000 enrichment credits, 600,000 workflow runs, a named support contact, migration services and custom integrations.

Rep seats (add-on)

Listed at $540 per user per year for routing plus scheduling, or $240 per user per year for scheduling only. Added on top of the platform plan, not included in it.

What twenty reps add to the platform fee

Twenty reps on routing plus scheduling adds $10,800 a year to a Growth plan, which is 20 x $540, on top of the listed $15,000 platform fee. Put those two lines next to each other before you quote a number internally, because the seat add-on at that size is most of a second platform fee again. The arithmetic is simple and the order of operations is what catches people: this is not a per-seat product with a setup fee, it is a platform fee with seats attached.

The seat split is the cheapest lever you have. Scheduling-only seats are listed at $240 per user per year against $540 for routing plus scheduling, a $300 difference per person, so twenty scheduling-only reps add $4,800 rather than $10,800. Work out which reps genuinely need routing, which is usually the people who receive assignments rather than everyone with a calendar, and license the rest accordingly. That decision belongs in the evaluation, not in the renewal.

Then price the tier against your volume rather than your headcount. Growth's 24,000 enrichment credits and 200,000 workflow runs a year are the constraint that moves teams to Scale, and the gap between the two listed platform fees is $21,000 a year. A campaign season that triples form volume is the realistic trigger, so model a peak quarter, not an average one, and ask what happens when you exceed a cap: whether you are throttled, billed for overage, or required to upgrade mid-term. Our sales tool business case template is where the platform fee, the seat split and the usage estimate belong on one page.

Two things to settle in writing. First, the prices: every figure on this page came from the vendor's own listing and has not been independently verified by us, so get the platform fee, the credit and workflow allowances, the two seat rates and the renewal uplift on a single order form. Second, the baseline: because Default argues it replaces a scheduler, a router and some enrichment spend, the business case rests on what you cancel, not on what you add. Write down today's total for those tools first. Our SaaS contract negotiation checklist covers the clause-level version, and how we review software explains what we verify and what we do not.

What Default gives up

You give up a small entry point. The listed Growth plan is $15,000 a year before a single rep seat, and that number does not scale down for a team with modest inbound volume. Reviewers who call it steep are describing the pricing structure rather than a sales tactic. If your inbound demo count is in the low tens per month, the honest comparison is against a per-seat scheduler and your existing CRM rules, not against another platform-fee product.

You give up certainty on what you will pay, in a smaller way than with a quote-only vendor but a real one. Our figures for Default are unverified, the listed page pairs a per-year figure with a per-month one, and usage caps mean the tier you sign is only correct for a given volume. None of that is a reason to walk away. It is a reason to confirm the numbers yourself and to ask for the overage behaviour in writing before the first campaign tests it.

You give up a fast start on complex logic. Several G2 reviewers mention up-front work to get complicated workflows production-ready, which is what you would expect from a tool whose value is owning routing rules that used to live in three systems. Budget RevOps hours alongside the licenses, and test the edge cases that break routers: existing customers submitting a form, duplicate contacts, personal-email submissions, conflicting rules and an assigned rep who is out of office.

You give up a free trial, or at least our sources show none listed. The pricing page lists no free plan and no trial, so the evaluation is a scoped pilot you have to ask for. Make the ask concrete: one real inbound form, your real CRM, and a measured time from submission to booked meeting on both the old path and the new one. Without that number you are buying a story about speed rather than evidence of it.

You give up the enterprise Salesforce routing depth that specialists sell. Teams with elaborate routing graphs and a Salesforce-only stack are the natural buyers for LeanData, whose own positioning is lead-to-account matching inside Salesforce. Default's counter-argument is multi-signal routing across forms, enrichment and intent, so the question is whether your routing complexity lives in the graph or in the signals. Answer that before you compare the two quotes, because they are not solving the same problem.

How Default compares

The split that decides this shortlist is the entry point you are willing to buy. Default and Chili Piper both sell a platform fee first and seats second, which makes them expensive for low inbound volume and reasonable for high. RevenueHero sells the same inbound moment with a small platform fee and per-seat pricing, which is the honest answer for a team that wanted form-to-meeting scheduling rather than a routing platform. LeanData is the Salesforce-centric incumbent and quotes rather than publishes. Qualified is a different product wearing a similar label: chat and an AI agent engaging website visitors rather than forms routing them, and it was acquired by Salesforce in April 2026. Read the price column with the billing unit in mind, and note that our Default figures are the vendor's own listing rather than numbers we have verified.

What to test in a Default evaluation

There is no trial listed, so this is a scoped pilot you have to ask for, and the first step happens before Default is involved at all. Every step below is designed to produce a number or a written answer you can take to procurement, because the decision here is a platform fee rather than a seat you can cancel next month.

1. Measure your current time from form submission to booked meeting, over a month of real submissions, before you look at any tool. Without that baseline there is nothing for the pilot to beat.
2. Run one real inbound form through Default end to end, with your real fields and your real CRM, and measure the same interval. The difference between those two numbers is the business case.
3. Test the edge cases that break inbound routers: an existing customer filling out a demo form, a duplicate contact, a personal-email submission, two routing rules that conflict, and an assigned rep who is out of office.
4. Check how it matches leads to existing accounts and owners in Salesforce or HubSpot, on your messiest records rather than on clean test data. This is where most routing errors originate.
5. Walk through calendar handling for round robins, time zones and reps on holiday, since a booked meeting on the wrong calendar is worse than no booking at all.
6. Count the enrichment credits and workflow runs your real volume consumes in the pilot, extrapolate to a peak quarter against the 24,000 credits and 200,000 runs on Growth, and ask in writing what happens when a cap is exceeded.
7. Decide which reps need routing plus scheduling at a listed $540 a year and which only need scheduling at $240, then price both splits. On twenty reps that choice is the difference between $10,800 and $4,800 a year.
8. List what you would cancel if you bought this, with current annual costs: the scheduler, the separate router, the enrichment spend. Then confirm the platform fee, the seat rates and the renewal uplift in writing, since the figures we hold are the vendor's own listing and are not independently verified.

Default questions buyers ask

What is Default used for?

Default is used to manage inbound leads: capturing form submissions, enriching and qualifying them, routing them to the right rep, and letting prospects book meetings right away.

How much does Default cost?

Growth costs $15,000 a year and Scale costs $36,000 a year, billed annually. Rep seats are extra: $540 per user per year for routing and scheduling, or $240 for scheduling only.

Which CRMs does Default work with?

Default lists Salesforce and HubSpot, along with Slack, Zapier, Google Calendar, Zoom, Snowflake, BigQuery, Segment, and Gong.

How does Default compare with Qualified?

Default centers on forms, enrichment, routing, and scheduling. Qualified is known for conversational marketing on the website. Our comparison page covers the differences in detail.

Is there a free trial for Default?

Default's pricing page does not list a free plan or trial. Ask about a pilot on one real inbound form so you get speed-to-meeting data you can compare.

Related

If Default is on your shortlist, the comparisons worth running depend on your entry point: Chili Piper where form-to-meeting routing is the whole job, RevenueHero where a per-seat scheduler is enough, and LeanData where routing lives inside Salesforce. The head to head buyers ask for most is Default against Qualified, the wider set sits in our revenue operations software directory and the lead routing software guide, and our lead routing rules template is the document to agree before anybody configures a rule.

Default sits in our Revenue Operations Software directory.