Loading content…
Leadfeeder vs Text Request
Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
1. Listing metadata
Field-level data| Leadfeeder | Text Request | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | — | — |
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| Leadfeeder | Text Request | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | — | — |
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Text contacts directly from Pipedrive with the Text Request integration and sync message history.
| Metric | Leadfeeder | Text Request |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.5 ★ | 2.5 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 239 | 4 |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, Leadfeeder is the stronger choice for most Pipedrive Marketplace merchants — 4.5★ vs Text Request's 2.5★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. Leadfeeder has the larger user base (239 reviews vs 4), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Text Request's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to Leadfeeder; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Text Request's 4-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Leadfeeder'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: Leadfeeder audit • Text Request audit
Leadfeeder has the higher average rating (4.5★ from 239 reviews) compared to Text Request (2.5★ from 4 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Leadfeeder fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Text Request is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Pipedrive Marketplace marketplace. Leadfeeder has more onboarding documentation maturity (239 reviews vs 4), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
Leadfeeder typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (239 reviews). Text Request aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (4 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Leadfeeder and Text Request 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 Text Request" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.