Loading content…
1. Listing metadata
Field-level data| involve.me | lemlist | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| involve.me | lemlist | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
The AI quiz funnel builder with built-in email automation. Capture, qualify, and automatically send personalized email sequences to Pipedrive leads
| Metric | involve.me | lemlist |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.5 ★ | 4.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | 3 | ★ 274 |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
Based on the data on this page, involve.me is the stronger choice for most Pipedrive Marketplace sales teams — 4.5★ vs lemlist's 4.0★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Pricing entry tiers: involve.me at Free, lemlist at Free. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (seats, usage volume, integrations) varies.
lemlist has the larger user base (274 reviews vs 3), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. involve.me's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage sales teams who need fast install and low risk should default to involve.me; mid-market and enterprise sales teams with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — lemlist's 274-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than involve.me's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Pipedrive Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: involve.me audit • lemlist audit
Both involve.me and lemlist offer paid plans only. involve.me starts at Free; lemlist starts at Free. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
involve.me has the higher average rating (4.5★ from 3 reviews) compared to lemlist (4.0★ from 274 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
involve.me holds the higher average rating (4.5★ vs 4.0★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Pipedrive Marketplace. lemlist has the deeper published review base (274 vs 3), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
involve.me typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (3 reviews). lemlist typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (274 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. involve.me and lemlist both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from involve.me" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.