| Jotform | Muraena | B2B Contacts | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Generate high-quality leads 10X faster. This plugin lets you integrate rich B2B data into your Pipedrive workflow.
| Metric | Jotform | Muraena | B2B Contacts |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.5 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 194 | 4 |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Review velocity (30d) | 0 new | — |
Based on the data on this page, Muraena | B2B Contacts is the stronger choice for most Pipedrive Marketplace sales teams — 5.0★ vs Jotform's 4.5★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Pricing entry tiers: Jotform at Free, Muraena | B2B Contacts 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.
Jotform has the larger user base (194 reviews vs 4), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Muraena | B2B Contacts'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 Muraena | B2B Contacts; mid-market and enterprise sales teams with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Jotform's 194-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Muraena | B2B Contacts'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: Jotform audit • Muraena | B2B Contacts audit
| Signal | Jotform | Muraena | B2B Contacts |
|---|---|---|
| Average rating | 4.5 ★ (194) | 5.0 ★ (4) |
| Reviews · last 7 days | +0 | — |
| Reviews · last 30 days | +0 | — |
| Reviews · last 90 days | +0 | — |
Both Jotform and Muraena | B2B Contacts offer paid plans only. Jotform starts at Free; Muraena | B2B Contacts starts at Free. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Muraena | B2B Contacts has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 4 reviews) compared to Jotform (4.5★ from 194 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Muraena | B2B Contacts holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.5★). 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. Jotform has the deeper published review base (194 vs 4), 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.
Jotform typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (194 reviews). Muraena | B2B Contacts typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (4 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. Jotform and Muraena | B2B Contacts 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 Muraena | B2B Contacts" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.