Skip to content
August 2026 · updated 2026-08-29

Pipedrive Pricing Holds Two Numbers, $14 and $24

This directory holds two prices for Pipedrive and a read date for neither. They disagree by 71%, there is no free tier to explain the gap, and no check on this site was built to catch it.

You searched for what Pipedrive costs and this page is going to disappoint you in a specific and, we think, useful way.

This directory holds two prices for Pipedrive and cannot tell you which one is the entry seat rate. The record says $14 in the entry-price field and $24 in the seat field. It also says there is no free tier, which removes the usual reason those two numbers differ.

Neither figure carries a read date.

Nothing on this page was measured and nothing on it was re-read for this draft. Every figure is what this site's entity record holds, and that record has no pricingVerifiedOn value at all, which means neither number has been read off pipedrive.com since the initial research pass. Where a number is arithmetic on those figures rather than one of them, it says [computed].

What follows: what each of the two fields is supposed to mean, why a record with no free tier should not have two different prices in them, what the gap is worth at four team sizes, why this site is publishing the disagreement instead of quietly picking the smaller number, the check that would settle it in ten minutes, and the two pages on this site that already print one half of it.

What does Pipedrive cost?

Between $14 and $24 a user a month, and this site cannot narrow it further without re-reading the vendor's page.

There is no free tier. The purchase is self-serve, so you can buy it without speaking to anyone, which is true of six of the ten CRM and pipeline tools in this directory. Beyond those three facts, the record is thin: no tier names, no annual rate, no seat caps, no contract record, and no review.

FieldWhat this site holdsWhat it meansRead date
entryMonthly$14Lowest published entry price per month, monthly-billing basisNone on record
perSeat$24What one seat costs on that same basisNone on record
freeTierfalseThere is no $0 planNone on record
selfServetrueYou can complete the purchase without a sales callNone on record
pricingModelper-seatThe bill scales with headcountNone on record
Tier namesNot heldThis site does not know what the plans are calledn/a
Annual rateNot heldNo annual figure and no discount badge recordedn/a
Seat capsNot heldWhether any tier stops at a headcount is unknown heren/a

That table is the whole of what this site knows. A page that printed a four-tier ladder from it would be printing somebody's memory.

Why two numbers on one record is a fault, not a feature

Both fields exist for good reasons and they legitimately differ on plenty of records here.

HubSpot is $0 entry and $20 a seat, because the free tier is real and the seat rate applies once you leave it. Attio is $0 and $44 for the same reason. On a product with no free tier and one seat-based ladder, the entry price and the cheapest seat are the same number by definition, which is why Close reads $19 and $19 and folk reads $30 and $30.

Pipedrive has no free tier and two different numbers.

So one of three things is true and this site cannot say which. The $14 may be an annual rate recorded next to a monthly seat rate, which is the single most common price error in this whole directory and the one that produced the Attio and Loom corrections. Or $24 may be a higher tier that got written into the seat field. Or the ladder may have moved since the figures were entered and both are stale in different directions.

The check built for this cannot see it

This site runs a script whose entire job is finding price disagreements inside its own data. It exists because on 29 August 2026 three writers independently hit an entity record and a review naming different entry prices for the same tool, and it currently reports three unresolved cases: Instantly, lemlist and Sales Navigator.

It compares the entity record against the review. Pipedrive has no review.

So the check runs clean over a record holding two contradictory prices, because the fault is inside one file rather than across two. That is worth writing down as a finding about the check rather than about the vendor. A consistency test that only looks at pairs is blind to every record without a partner, and in this directory the records without a partner are the majority: twenty of the entities here have both a price and a price-naming review, against more than two hundred that do not.

The generalisation is uncomfortable and correct. A guard that covers your most-documented records covers your least-risky ones.

What the gap is worth

Budgeting from the wrong end of a $14-to-$24 spread costs a fixed amount per seat per year, and it scales linearly because the model is per seat.

SeatsAt $14/user/moAt $24/user/moMonthly gapAnnual gap
1$14$24$10 [computed]$120 [computed]
5$70 [computed]$120 [computed]$50 [computed]$600 [computed]
10$140 [computed]$240 [computed]$100 [computed]$1,200 [computed]
25$350 [computed]$600 [computed]$250 [computed]$3,000 [computed]
50$700 [computed]$1,200 [computed]$500 [computed]$6,000 [computed]

The ratio is 1.71x [computed], which is to say the upper figure is 71% above the lower one. For comparison, the annual-billing discounts published across this directory run around 10% to 25%, so the spread here is three to seven times wider than any discount that could explain it.

That is the argument for publishing the gap rather than averaging it. An average would be a number no buyer can pay, sitting in a field that other pages read from, and it would look exactly as confident as a real price.

This site already publishes one half of it

Two pages here quote Pipedrive at $14 a user and both flag the missing date. The CRM comparison table in the Attio pricing breakdown carries the cell No read date recorded. The ten-row roster in the Salesloft alternatives page carries No date on record and prints both $14 and $24 in adjacent columns without remarking on the distance between them. Both are honest about the date. Neither noticed the disagreement, which is how a fault survives two careful reviews.

This page does not correct those two. It records that all three now say the same thing, which is that the figure is unverified, and adds the part they missed.

Eight of ten CRM rows carry a date. This is not one

ToolEntry / moSeat / moFree tierPrice read
Copper$12$29No2026-08-12
Pipedrive$14$24NoNone
Close$19$19No2026-08-12
HubSpot$0$20 listYes2026-08-12
Salesforce$25$25No2026-08-12
folk$30$30No2026-08-11
Attio$0$44Yes2026-08-11
SalesloftNot publishedNot publishedNo2026-08-11
OutreachNot publishedNot publishedNo2026-08-11
MomentumNot publishedNot publishedNoNone

Two rows carry no date. Only one of them has a price attached to it, and it is the one you came here to read.

Read the entry and seat columns together across the whole table and the pattern is clean everywhere else. The rows where the two columns differ are the two with free tiers and Copper, which publishes a genuinely cheaper entry plan below its standard seat. Pipedrive is the one row where the columns differ, the free tier is absent and the date is missing all at once.

What Pipedrive is, since the price is unavailable

A pipeline-first CRM built around the deal board, deliberately simpler than the platforms. That simplicity is the product rather than a limitation of it, and the reason teams pick it is usually that nobody wants to administer a CRM.

Marketing and support capabilities are thin, and it does not pretend otherwise. That is the most honest positioning of any CRM record in this directory, and it is worth more than a feature list. A tool that names its own boundary is a tool you can size against your requirements in an afternoon.

If you want the marketing side attached, the comparison is HubSpot and the thing to model is contact tiers rather than seats. If your motion is dialing, it is Close. If your process does not fit standard objects, it is Attio, where the eleventh hire is the number to know.

How to settle this in ten minutes

You can do what this page did not, and you do not need an account.

  • Open pipedrive.com/pricing and find the billing toggle before you read any number. Two minutes. If the page opens on annual billing, every figure on it is a year's commitment divided by twelve, and that alone would explain a $14 sitting next to a $24.
  • Write down the cheapest per-user rate on the MONTHLY setting. That is the basis this directory records on, and it is the only rate you can pay without agreeing to a year.
  • Write down the same tier's annual rate. If the two are $24 and $14, this page's disagreement is a billing-basis error and it is solved.
  • Check whether any tier has a seat ceiling. Attio's Plus tier stops at ten users, which turns the eleventh hire into a 2.48x repricing event, and a ceiling printed as a feature bullet is the one thing that can make a correct seat rate produce a wrong budget.
  • Note the date you did all this. That is the step everyone skips, and it is the reason this page exists.

Pass condition: you have one monthly per-user figure, one annual per-user figure, and a date. Fail condition: the page shows a currency you did not choose, in which case find the selector before quoting anything, because a pricing page that renders in the visitor's local currency has already produced one wrong figure in this directory.

Why we will not just pick the smaller number

It would be easy, it would look better, and it would be a guess wearing a price's clothes.

The rule this site runs on is that where sources disagree you publish the disagreement rather than resolving it by preference. It is in the header comment of the type definitions, above the schema, because that is where it gets read at the moment somebody is about to break it. Picking $14 because it flatters the vendor, or $24 because it is safer for the buyer, would both be the same act: choosing a number for a reason that is not evidence.

The cost of publishing the gap is that this page ranks worse than one that confidently prints a ladder. That is a real cost and we are paying it deliberately.

What breaks in month three

The seat you added without checking the tier. On a per-seat CRM with no free tier, every hire is a billing event, and the only question is whether it is a linear one. This site does not hold Pipedrive's seat caps, so it cannot tell you whether there is a cliff in the ladder.

The thing it told you it does not do. Marketing and support are thin by design. Teams that bought a sales CRM and then needed a marketing tool end up with a second contract and an integration, which is a larger cost than any seat rate on this page.

And the annual commitment you made from a monthly-looking number. If the $14 turns out to be the annual rate, a team that budgeted $14 monthly is over by 71% and has also lost the ability to stop.

So what should you budget?

Budget $24 a user a month until you have read the page yourself.

That is not a claim that $24 is the price. It is the higher of the two figures this site holds, and budgeting from the higher end of an unresolved range is the only version of this that cannot go wrong in the expensive direction. At ten seats that is $2,880 a year [computed] against $1,680 at the lower figure, and if the lower one turns out to be right you have found $1,200 rather than lost it.

Then go and get a date on it. Every price in this directory carries one for exactly the reason this page demonstrates, and the rows without one are marked rather than assumed current.

What this page does not know

Questions

How much does Pipedrive cost per user?
This site holds two figures and a read date for neither: $14 in the entry-price field and $24 in the seat field, on a record with no free tier to explain the difference. They disagree by 71%. Until pipedrive.com/pricing is re-read on the monthly billing toggle, the honest answer is a range rather than a price, and budgeting from $24 is the version of that range that cannot go wrong expensively.
Does Pipedrive have a free plan?
No. This site records freeTier as false, which is one of the few Pipedrive facts here that does not depend on the unresolved price. It also records the purchase as self-serve, so you can buy without a sales call, which six of the ten CRM and pipeline tools in this directory allow.
Why does this page not just give me a tier ladder?
Because this site does not hold Pipedrive's tier names, and printing a ladder it has not read would be reproducing somebody's memory of a page. The rule here is that a price is only a price if a vendor showed it to a buyer in a currency for a stated period, and somebody wrote down the day they read it.
Is Pipedrive cheaper than HubSpot?
At the entry point HubSpot is $0 because it has a real free tier and Pipedrive has none, so at one seat HubSpot is cheaper by whatever Pipedrive's entry rate turns out to be. Above the free tier HubSpot's list seat is $20, read 12 August 2026, which sits between this site's two Pipedrive figures. The thing to model with HubSpot is contact tiers rather than seats.
What is Pipedrive bad at?
Marketing and support capabilities are thin, and the vendor does not pretend otherwise. It is a sales CRM built around the deal board. Teams who need the marketing side attached tend to end up with a second contract and an integration, which costs more than any seat rate in this category.
How do I check a CRM price properly?
Find the billing toggle before you read any number, record the monthly per-user rate and the annual per-user rate separately, check whether any tier has a seat ceiling rather than a seat allowance, confirm the currency selector, and write down the date. That last step is the one everybody skips and it is the reason this page exists.

Tools mentioned

All tools

Sources

Source interests are labelled. Almost everything published about this subject is written by someone selling into it.

More from the blog

All posts