Fenlo vs Guru: how the two platforms compare
Guru and Fenlo both promise trustworthy, cited answers from company knowledge. The difference is where that knowledge lives. Guru's core model is a set of hand-authored "Cards" that subject-matter experts write and periodically re-verify, with 100+ integrations to help capture that content. Fenlo doesn't ask anyone to author or verify a parallel knowledge base — it indexes Slack, Google Drive, Confluence, Jira, and the rest of your existing stack directly, and cites the live source document.
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
| Fenlo | Guru | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Published, self-serve, per seat, no seat minimum | $25/seat/month self-serve (10-seat minimum); Enterprise moving to fully custom quotes |
| Free tier | Yes, bring your own model keys | Free for up to 3 users only |
| Knowledge model | Indexes and cites your existing documents directly | Hand-authored "Cards," kept fresh through scheduled verification cycles |
| Ongoing maintenance | Re-syncs automatically from source tools | Requires an owner to write, review, and re-verify cards over time |
| AI assistant / agents | Cited answers, deep research, configurable agents with approval-gated actions | Knowledge Agents that answer from verified cards; MCP server (March 2026) |
| Delivery | Web, Slack/Teams, API, custom agents | Browser extension, Slack/Teams, API |
| Compliance | GDPR & CCPA compliant, SOC 2 Type II in progress | SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA-ready, GDPR compliant |
A governed wiki vs. search over what you already have
Guru's differentiator is genuinely useful for a specific problem: keeping a small set of frequently-asked, high-stakes answers accurate over time. Verification workflows flag cards for review on a schedule, and customers like Faire report reaching 93% verified coverage across their collections. That's real value if your support or sales team leans on the same 200 answers every week and someone is willing to own keeping them current.
It's also a second content system to maintain. Every card is something a person wrote, and every verification cycle is something a person has to act on, or the "verified" badge becomes stale.
Fenlo skips that step. Search and the AI assistant work directly against Confluence pages, Drive docs, Slack threads, and tickets that already exist. When the source document changes, the next sync picks it up — there's no separate card to rewrite and no verification queue to clear.
Pricing and minimums
Guru's self-serve tier is $25 per seat per month with a 10-seat minimum, putting the real entry price at $250/month, and the company has been shifting enterprise pricing toward fully custom, sales-scoped packages with no published rate.
Fenlo publishes pricing for every tier, including a free plan with no seat minimum, then $21 or $33 per seat per month as you need platform-provided models, unlimited connectors, or enterprise controls like SSO and SCIM.
Which one fits
Pick Guru if your team's biggest knowledge problem is a defined set of answers — sales talk tracks, support macros, HR policies — that benefit from explicit human sign-off, and you have someone ready to own the verification cadence.
Pick Fenlo if you want an assistant that can answer from everything already in your existing tools, without standing up a parallel content-authoring workflow, and want to start on a free plan with no per-seat minimum.
Read more about what Fenlo is or talk to sales about migrating from another platform.