Decagon vs Sierra
A side-by-side comparison of Decagon and Sierra, two Support tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Decagon | Sierra |
|---|---|---|
| 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) | Decagon | Sierra |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
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
Sierra
Outcome-based pricing — you pay per successful resolution, not per seat or per conversation.
- Pay per resolved outcome, not flat seats
- Omnichannel: chat, voice, email, SMS, WhatsApp
- Founder pedigree (Bret Taylor, Clay Bavor)
- Heavy Fortune 500 adoption
- Enterprise-only; contracts start six figures
- Plus setup fees in the tens of thousands
- Outcome definitions are negotiated and can drift
- No self-serve or transparent pricing
When to pick which
Both cover Voice agent and Ticket deflection.
Pick Decagon if you need Email assistant.
- Email assistant (secondary capability)
Pick Sierra if you need LLM observability and AI app builder.
- LLM observability (secondary capability)
- AI app builder (secondary capability)
Sierra leans on Voice agent as a headline capability; Decagon treats it as secondary.
- Voice agent (primary capability)