Now/AI

Fenlo vs Glean: how the two platforms compare

Fenlo Team

Fenlo and Glean solve the same core problem: knowledge scattered across dozens of tools, with no single place to search it or ask a question and get a sourced answer. Both connect tools like Slack, Google Workspace, Jira, and Confluence. Both respect the permissions already set in those tools. Both let you build AI agents on top of your indexed knowledge.

Where they diverge is pricing, transparency, and who the platform is designed for on day one. This comparison reflects publicly available information as of August 2026. Pricing and packaging change on both sides, so confirm current terms directly before deciding.

At a glance

FenloGlean
Pricing modelPublished, self-serve, per seatCustom quote through sales
Free tierYes, bring your own model keysNo published free tier
Typical entry pointIndividual or small teamEnterprise, often 100+ seat minimums
SearchHybrid keyword + vector, permission-awareHybrid keyword + vector, permission-aware
AI assistantCited answers, deep research, web searchCited answers via RAG
Custom agentsScoped knowledge, configurable behavior, multi-step actions with approval gatesAgent building supported, enterprise-configured
Connectors60+, plus custom MCP and OpenAPI actionsDozens of native connectors
ComplianceGDPR compliant, SOC 2 Type II in progressEnterprise compliance program, contract-dependent

Pricing and who buys first

This is the sharpest difference. Fenlo publishes its pricing: free for small teams that bring their own API keys, then a flat per-seat rate once you want platform-provided models and no cap on connectors. You can sign up and start indexing without a sales call.

Glean does not publish standard pricing. Buyer reports and third-party analyses put entry-level contracts in the range of $50 to $75 per user per month, often with minimum deployments around 100 seats, which puts a realistic floor on a Glean contract in the tens of thousands of dollars a year before any usage-based add-ons. That model makes sense for a company standardizing search across a 2,000-person org. It is a hard floor for a 20-person engineering team that wants to try the idea first.

Permissions

Both platforms take the same position: they mirror your existing access controls rather than inventing a parallel permission system. Neither shows a user a document they could not already open in the source tool, and neither offers an admin override that bypasses that. If your evaluation criteria include permission-aware search, both meet the bar. The difference is how quickly you can verify that for yourself. Fenlo’s permission-aware search and hybrid search are documented and testable on a free account, without a procurement cycle first.

Agents

Both platforms let you build agents scoped to specific knowledge. Fenlo’s agents are configured with custom instructions and a restricted knowledge base, can execute multi-step actions like updating a ticket or drafting a document, and pause for human approval before anything sensitive runs. Agents can be shared with a person, a group, or the whole workspace, with usage analytics and version history attached.

Glean’s agent capabilities are positioned similarly, built on the same enterprise-grade indexing that powers its search. The practical difference tends to be packaging and rollout speed: Fenlo agents are available on the same self-serve plan as search, while Glean’s agent features are typically part of a larger, sales-negotiated deployment.

Which one fits

Pick Glean if you are a large enterprise standardizing on one vendor for search and AI across thousands of seats, already run a sales-led procurement process, and value a platform built specifically for that scale.

Pick Fenlo if you want to start free, see indexed results against your own tools within minutes, and pay a published per-seat price as you grow, whether that is a 10-person team or a security-conscious enterprise that still wants SSO, SCIM, and audit logs.

Read more about what Fenlo is or talk to sales about migrating from another platform.