Comparison
Ukrainian Gmail-native CRM and a business-process builder on flexible folders. Architectural implementation by WDP in 3–5 weeks.

NetHunt CRM

VS
A Ukrainian unified workspace for SMB: CRM, tasks, chats, org structure, and AI. A Bitrix24 alternative for most SMB scenarios. Architectural implementation from 3 weeks.

Uspacy

NetHunt is a Gmail-native CRM and business-process builder on flexible folders for teams on Google Workspace. Uspacy is a Ukrainian single workspace (CRM + tasks + chats + feed + org structure) with native AI and ready-made modules out of the box. We compare architecture, automation, AI and integrations for the Ukrainian market.

In short

NetHunt CRM vs Uspacy
in a nutshell

In short
  1. NetHunt is a Gmail-native CRM and business-process builder on flexible folders: records, sales pipelines, native tasks and correspondence in a single Google Workspace window. It covers non-sales processes too, via folder structure + tasks + Workflows.
  2. Uspacy is a Ukrainian single workspace: CRM, tasks, internal chats, social feed and org structure out of the box in one product, independent of the email provider. NetHunt has no internal team chat, feed or HR module out of the box.
  3. Uspacy has native built-in AI (call transcription, follow-up emails, tasks from a chat or email); NetHunt has no in-house AI — only external agents via the API.
  4. NetHunt is stronger in the Google ecosystem and email-native work; Uspacy in native Ukrainian operational processes (Nova Poshta, Monobank, fiscalization).
  5. There is no direct official migration route between the systems — we move CRM entities via API or CSV, and redesign the data model during discovery (the first phase of work: we map your processes in detail and design the solution).
Features

Head-to-head

A detailed capability breakdown. The winner depends on your priorities.

Criterion NetHunt CRM Uspacy
Ready-made team workspace out of the box (internal chat, feed, HR) A business-process builder on flexible folders: records, sales pipelines, native tasks and correspondence in a single Gmail window. It covers both sales and non-sales processes through folder structure. But there is no internal team chat, social feed or ready-made HR/org-structure module out of the box — that is not what the product is built for; external correspondence with clients runs in the Chats hub.
Advantage
A single workspace in one product: CRM (leads, deals, contacts, products) + tasks (kanban, templates, time tracking) + internal chats + social feed + a ready-made "Company and people" module (org structure, profiles, onboarding) — all out of the box, with no assembling from folders.
Email and the Google ecosystem
Advantage
A native CRM inside Gmail: inbound and outbound emails are automatically linked to records, with Calendar, Drive, Meet and Contacts integrated. Auto-linking of mail without switching tabs is the core of the product.
Email is a separate module, independent of the provider: it works with any mailbox. There is no deep two-way "CRM inside the inbox" integration by design — here email is a channel, not the work environment.
Automation A built-in Workflows engine: triggers (field or stage change, new email, inbound webhook — instant notification between systems), conditions, actions (record update, email, email sequence, outbound HTTP request). Strong in triggers for sales and HTTP; available from the Business plan. Conditional automations (trigger → condition → action): limited on Standard, unlimited on Professional. Inbound and outbound webhooks are unlimited starting from Standard. There is no multi-step complex business-process automation — complex logic is offloaded to Make or n8n.
Native AI There is no in-house built-in AI as of mid-2026 — automation works strictly by predefined rules. AI agents can only be connected externally via MCP or API (Composio, Lindy), so it is an integration, not a built-in assistant.
Advantage
Native AI on the Standard and Professional plans: call transcription and a conversation summary in the record, follow-up email generation from a recording, task creation from a chat, email or note, comment-thread summaries, and an AI daily dashboard.
Modeling non-sales processes without coding (tasks, requests, arbitrary entities) Custom record folders with unlimited fields and relations, plus native tasks (assignees, deadlines, priority, automatic assignment to assignees, creation from Workflows) and the Workflows engine — a builder for tasks, request handling and any operational process. Verified: an English-language school (students, teachers, groups, payments — a lightweight accounting/operations system on 4 linked folders). The number of folders is capped by the plan, so such models realistically require Business+. Smart objects — custom entities with fields, status pipelines, conditional automations and webhooks, plus a built-in tasks and projects module. On lower plans the limit is up to 5 objects; on Professional it is unlimited; only the workspace owner or admin can create them.
Ukrainian integration ecosystem Native Ukrainian telephony: Ringostat, Binotel, UniTalk, Stream Telecom, Phonet. Messengers in the Chats hub: Telegram, WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, Viber. There is no native Nova Poshta — logistics runs through Make or the API.
Advantage
A marketplace built for the Ukrainian market: the same telephony plus native Nova Poshta (logistics), Monobank (banking), Checkbox and Vchasno.Kasa (fiscalization), Finmap, and the Prom and Rozetka marketplaces. Broader coverage of operational processes beyond sales.
API and integrations REST API v1 (folders, records, comments, call logs, Gmail-thread linking), available only from the Business plan. Zapier and Make are supported. From May 2026 — a native BigQuery connector for BI analytics.
Advantage
A documented REST API (auth, crm, tasks, messenger, email, files) with OpenAPI and llms.txt, Bearer or OAuth authorization via the Marketplace, and inbound and outbound webhooks on all paid plans. The vendor builds its own product on this very API.
Onboarding and cost at scale A low barrier to entry for a sales team on Google (G2 rating 4.6/5). But folders, workflows and the API are locked to higher plans, and the license is billed per user on every plan — for a team of 20+ with automations the bill grows quickly. Free for up to 5 users; Standard and Professional do not cap the number of users (billed per user), while unlimited automations, sales pipelines and Smart objects unlock on Professional. A transparent 3-plan model with no per-module maze.
Verdict

Which to choose

Our experience implementing both systems comes down to two simple rules.

NetHunt CRM
Choose NetHunt if your team lives in Google Workspace and the key value is having the client history assembled in a record straight from Gmail without switching tabs. It is the rational choice for B2B sales with active email correspondence and — more broadly — for anyone who wants a business-process builder on flexible folders: modeling non-sales entities, task management and request handling through folders + native tasks + Workflows (schools, agencies, service operations — like the lightweight accounting/operations system of an English-language school on 4 linked folders). It fits when you need native Ukrainian telephony and BI analytics via BigQuery, while an internal team chat, social feed and HR module are either unnecessary or already covered by other tools.
Uspacy
Choose Uspacy if you need a single tool for all departments with ready-made modules out of the box — CRM plus tasks, an internal team chat, social feed and org structure/HR, which you do not have to assemble from folders. It is the rational choice for teams of 5–200 with several departments, for networks and franchises with centralized management, for anyone to whom built-in AI (call transcription, follow-up emails, tasks from emails) and native Ukrainian operational processes (Nova Poshta, Monobank, fiscalization) are critical, and for teams outside the Google ecosystem to whom NetHunt's email-native nature gives nothing.

Two different answers to the question “what is a CRM”

Comparing NetHunt and Uspacy is not a choice between two similar products, but a choice between two answers to the question of where the team’s work should live. NetHunt answers: in the inbox. It is a Gmail-native CRM and business-process builder on flexible folders, where the client record, the sales pipeline, native tasks and correspondence sit in a single Google Workspace window, and the salesperson does not switch tabs. Uspacy answers differently: in a single workspace. It is a Ukrainian all-in-one where the CRM sits next to tasks, internal chats, a social feed and an org-structure module — all as ready-made modules out of the box, with email being just one of the channels, independent of the provider. The first question to answer before comparing tables: do you need a Gmail-native process builder, or an operating system with ready-made team communication and HR for several departments.

Everything else follows from this architectural divergence. NetHunt is strong where the team already lives in Google: auto-linking of mail, integration with Calendar, Drive and Meet, flexible record folders plus native tasks and Workflows for modeling arbitrary processes — from sales pipelines to task management, request handling and a lightweight accounting/operations system (an English-language school on 4 linked folders). Uspacy is strong where ready-made modules out of the box are needed: built-in team communication (internal chats, social feed) and an org-structure/HR module that NetHunt does not have as separate products, native built-in AI (call transcription, follow-up email generation, tasks from emails and chats), native Ukrainian operational processes with Nova Poshta, Monobank and fiscalization, and a broader API in coverage. In the zones where both systems do the same thing — a builder of custom entities and processes without coding, automation by predefined rules without full-fledged complex business-process automation (BPM), per-user billing that gets more expensive at scale — this is honest parity, and we do not ascribe advantages where there are none.

The most important thing to understand about migration: there is no official “one-click” route between these systems, and data does not transfer symmetrically. NetHunt → Uspacy: we move contacts, companies, deals, fields and tasks via API or CSV, but Gmail correspondence does not migrate — it physically lives in Google mail, not in the CRM, and we redesign the flexible folder model into Uspacy’s Smart objects and sales pipelines. The reverse direction, Uspacy → NetHunt, is rare: CRM entities and tasks are migrated (NetHunt has native tasks), but internal chats, the social feed and org-structure/HR data have nowhere to go — NetHunt has no such ready-made modules, so the rest of the team communication is offloaded to external tools or redesigned into folders. In both cases this is a redesign of the data model, not a one-to-one copy.

Who in the organization makes this decision also depends on the answer to the first question. If the choice is made by a department head whose team is already on Google, and they need to stand up a process in the inbox quickly — from a sales pipeline to operational processes on folders — NetHunt can be implemented fast and pointwise. If the decision is at the owner or COO level and it is about closing sales, operations, internal communication and HR with ready-made modules of one product — that is Uspacy’s zone, but here it is critical to run discovery (the first phase of work: we map your processes in detail and design the solution) and clearly delineate processes at the start: a broad “all-in-one” scope without discipline gets blurred, and instead of one orderly workspace the team ends up with several half-filled modules. We always start by describing the current processes and only then map them onto the technical capabilities of one system or another.

FAQ

FAQ
on choosing

Not sure which fits better?

We work with both. Book a free intro consultation and we'll match the architecture to your processes.