Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Smarsh enables organizations to archive Chatter files and communications to automate compliance and policy management, and support record-keeping and e-discovery initiatives.
| Archiving & Compliance for Chatter | Alfred | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer |
| Metric | Archiving & Compliance for Chatter | Alfred |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.3 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | 9 | ★ 19 |
| Free plan | — | ★ Yes |
| Pricing | paid | freemium |
| Pricing tiers | — | 2 tiers |
| Listed features | 3 | ★ 9 |
| Languages | 1 supported | 15 supported |
| Listed since | Oct 2012 | May 2023 |
Based on the data on this page, Alfred is the stronger choice for most Salesforce AppExchange admins — 5.0★ vs Archiving & Compliance for Chatter's 4.3★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
On pricing, Alfred offers a free tier (freemium) while Archiving & Compliance for Chatter starts at paid. The free option meaningfully reduces evaluation cost, particularly at low usage volumes where the entry-paid tier can outpace the value delivered.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to Alfred; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Archiving & Compliance for Chatter's 9-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Alfred'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 Salesforce AppExchange 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: Archiving & Compliance for Chatter audit • Alfred audit
| Listed |
|---|
| Last updated | — | — |
|---|
| Keyword | Archiving & Compliance for Chatter | Alfred |
|---|---|---|
| updates | Not ranked | #3 |
| chatter | #7 | Not ranked |
| your own | Not ranked | #8 |
| video calls | Not ranked | #8 |
No tracked changes.
Alfred is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (freemium). Archiving & Compliance for Chatter starts at paid. Both publish their pricing on the Salesforce AppExchange; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
Alfred has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 19 reviews) compared to Archiving & Compliance for Chatter (4.3★ from 9 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Alfred holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.3★). 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 Salesforce AppExchange. Alfred has the deeper published review base (19 vs 9), 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.
Archiving & Compliance for Chatter typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (9 reviews). Alfred typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (19 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. Archiving & Compliance for Chatter and Alfred 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 Archiving & Compliance for Chatter" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
