COMPARISON

GTM Engine vs Clay, Zapier & n8n

A foundation, not duct tape

The Problem

Clay, Zapier, and n8n are duct tape. They're not designed to maintain relationship graphs. The workflows are brittle. They require constant maintenance. And they can't solve the fundamental problem: AI generates text, CRMs need structured data.

Key Differences

Architecture

GTM Engine

Purpose-built Common Customer Data Model (CCDM) that maintains relationship graphs

Clay, Zapier & n8n

Point-to-point integrations that break when schemas change

Maintenance

GTM Engine

Zero maintenance—we handle schema changes and data transformations

Clay, Zapier & n8n

Requires constant babysitting as workflows break

Data Quality

GTM Engine

Structured data extraction with type-safe field updates

Clay, Zapier & n8n

AI generates text, but CRMs need picklists, dates, and numbers

Deduplication

GTM Engine

Built-in deduplication, record merging, and orphaned record detection

Clay, Zapier & n8n

No native data quality features

You can't duct-tape your way to a unified customer view.

RevOps teams have become full-time integration maintenance engineers. They're holding GTM together with brittle workflows, Clay tables that break every week, custom scripts nobody understands. The core problem: these tools weren't designed to maintain the relationship graph between accounts, contacts, opportunities, and activities.

Making the Switch

Stop maintaining brittle workflows. GTM Engine connects to your existing stack and handles the hard data problems automatically—so you can focus on improving GTM operations instead of babysitting integrations.

Ready to see the difference?

Connect your existing stack over a weekend. Come in Monday to a completely different CRM.

Replace Your Duct Tape