PYRAMYD vs Crayon
Crayon prices by competitor count. PYRAMYD prices by seat.
Crayon is the premium CI platform · quote-gated, premium-priced, and scales by how many competitors you track. PYRAMYD ships a typed graph of 249K+ products pre-populated, with public per-seat pricing · CI lives in the Competition hub, alongside four more hubs on a free Foundation.
Crayon: per-competitor pricing · quote-gatedPYRAMYD: per-seat · transparent · five hubs
Side-by-side
The CI category, framed two ways.
| Dimension | Crayon | PYRAMYD |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing axis | Number of competitors tracked drives the contract size. Expanding competitive coverage spikes the bill. | Per-active-seat with org-wide read access. Competitive coverage is unlimited · you query whatever subset of the 249K-product graph you need. |
| Data substrate | Scrapes competitor websites + ingests customer-uploaded battle-card content. Best-in-class signal feed for competitor pages. | Typed product graph · 90 node types, 249K+ products, 2,539 categories, 2.4M+ reviews-as-edges. Crayon-style competitor diffs + structured product/category/feature relationships. |
| AI surface | Sparks, Crayon Answers, Win Story Insights · layered onto the document substrate. | APEX · 20 specialist agents over the typed graph, MCP-native, full per-claim citation chain. Battlecards agent + Win/Loss agent + Competitive Diffs agent are 3 of the 21. |
| Citation model | Cards link to source documents and competitor URLs. | Per-claim citation chain (source URL, retrieval timestamp, model, prompt hash, quality, confidence) · Article 50 ready. |
| Pricing transparency | Premium, quote-gated. No public pricing. Vendr median mid-market $20K-$40K/yr, enterprise $50K-$100K+. | Public pricing: free Foundation, then hubs from $150/seat/mo à la carte, or bundled plans (Starter $150 · Growth $735 · Enterprise from $940 per seat/mo). |
| Bundle breadth | CI platform · some adjacent modules (Win Story, Sparks) but core surface is competitor cards. | Five hubs on one graph · Explore + Competition + Customer + Product + Studio, all on a free Foundation. |
| Refresh model | Battle cards refresh as analysts maintain them. Per Klue's published data (industry-wide CI benchmark): cards lag competitive moves by 6-8x. | Cards assembled on demand from the live graph · refresh weekly automatically. 38s source-to-graph latency on signals. |
| Analyst rating | Generally most expensive dedicated CI platform per Clozd's 2026 comparison. Strong brand in CI category. | New entrant in 2026. The substrate-first pitch is differentiated · not competing on CI brand, competing on the data layer underneath CI. |
When to pick each
Two takes on competitive intelligence.
Pick Crayon when
- Your CI team has been on Crayon for years and the team is fluent in the Spark / Answer workflows.
- Competitor-page scraping at scale is your dominant signal need.
- You've standardized on Crayon's win-story and battle-card formats and rebuilding would cost too much.
- Your competitive landscape is narrow (under 20 tracked) so Crayon's per-competitor pricing pencils.
Pick PYRAMYD when
- Your competitive landscape is wide (50+ vendors) and per-competitor pricing penalizes coverage.
- You want one platform where competitive intelligence is one hub among Explore, Customer, Product, and Studio — not a standalone CI subscription.
- Public, transparent per-seat pricing matters · you're tired of quote-gated CI contracts.
- Stale battle cards are a real operational pain (Klue's own data: 6-8x refresh gap vs competitor velocity).
Bottom line
Crayon is premium CI you fill in. PYRAMYD is the substrate underneath CI — the Competition hub plus four more hubs · pre-populated, per-seat, transparent.
Crayon's strength is brand recognition and signal-feed quality. PYRAMYD's strength is shipping with the typed graph already in place and putting all five hubs on one per-seat platform.
See PYRAMYD against your competitive set.
30 minutes. Bring your top-10 competitors. We'll load them as a graph slice and run a battlecard with citations live on the call.