Cresta vs Decagon
A side-by-side comparison of Cresta and Decagon, two Support tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Cresta | Decagon |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Support | Support |
| Pricing | PAID | PAID |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms | Web, API | Web, API |
| Model support | Multi-model | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | Cresta | Decagon |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Cresta
Supervises human and AI-led conversations in one Agent Operations Center, built for the hybrid contact center.
- Real-time human agent assist
- Autonomous AI agents too
- Omnichannel voice + digital
- Enterprise deployments
- Enterprise sales-only pricing
- Heavy implementation effort
- Aimed at large contact centers
Decagon
Prices per conversation or resolution, not per seat, and lets ops teach agents via natural-language procedures.
- Outcome-based pricing
- Ops author logic, engineers keep guardrails
- Chat, email, and voice
- Takes actions, not just answers
- Enterprise sales-only
- Setup and tuning required
- Model choice abstracted away
When to pick which
Both cover Voice agent and Ticket deflection.
Pick Cresta if you need Conversation intelligence.
- Conversation intelligence (secondary capability)
Pick Decagon if you need Email assistant.
- Email assistant (secondary capability)
Cresta leans on Voice agent as a headline capability; Decagon treats it as secondary.
- Voice agent (primary capability)