Skip to content

Best AI Meeting Assistants, Otter vs Fireflies vs Fathom

Otter, Fireflies and Fathom compared on transcription, summaries, and which one is genuinely worth a paid seat.

Eddie Ochieng

Eddie Ochieng

June 23, 2026· Updated Jul 13, 2026

4 min read
An online video meeting on a laptop
Photo: Diva Plavalaguna / Pexels

Nobody enjoys taking minutes. AI meeting assistants join your calls, transcribe everything, and hand you a summary with action items while you actually pay attention to the conversation. The three names that come up most are Otter, Fireflies, and Fathom, and they are more different than they first appear.

We put all three on the same set of calls, a sales chat, a messy team standup, and a one to one, and judged them on transcription accuracy, summary quality, and what you get without paying.

How we compared

We compared published pricing, the transcription and summary features each vendor documents, and the consistent themes in user reviews, especially around accuracy on crosstalk and accents. Free tier limits come straight from the vendors. Where we recommend one over another, that is a judgement drawn from this research.

Otter

Otter is the veteran and it shows in transcription quality, which was the most accurate of the three on clear audio. It produces a clean, searchable transcript in real time, highlights key points, and its assistant can answer questions about what was said. It leans toward people who want the full record, not just a summary.

The free tier is the most limited here, capping monthly minutes tightly, so regular users will hit the paywall quickly.

Fireflies

Fireflies is the integrator. It plugs into a huge range of tools, pushes notes into your CRM, and its search across past meetings is excellent. If your meetings feed a sales pipeline or a knowledge base, Fireflies fits the workflow better than the others. Its AI summaries are strong and customisable.

All that flexibility means more setup. It rewards teams who configure it, and feels like more than you need if you just want quick notes from a weekly call.

Fathom

Fathom is the surprise. Its free tier is genuinely generous, with unlimited recording and transcription for individuals, which neither rival matches. The summaries are fast, clean, and well structured, and the whole thing is refreshingly simple to use. For solo professionals and small teams it is the easiest to recommend.

It is more focused than Fireflies, with fewer deep integrations, so very process heavy teams may outgrow it. For most people that simplicity is the point.

ToolPriceBest for
OtterFree tier, Pro from about $10/user/moMost accurate transcripts
FirefliesFree tier, paid from about $10/seat/moCRM and tool integrations
FathomFree for individuals, paid from about $15/moBest free tier and simplicity

Before you record anyone

Recording people speaking has rules. In many places you must tell everyone on the call that an assistant is capturing it, and some industries have stricter requirements. Turn on the visible recording notice and get consent before you rely on these tools at work.

FAQ

Which is most accurate?+

Otter had the edge on clear audio in our tests, with Fathom close behind. All three struggle a little with heavy crosstalk and strong accents, as every transcription tool does.

Is there a genuinely free option?+

Fathom has the most generous free tier by a wide margin, with unlimited recording and transcription for individual users. Otter and Fireflies free tiers are capped.

Do they work with Zoom, Meet, and Teams?+

Yes, all three support the major video platforms. Fireflies has the widest set of extra integrations beyond the call itself.

Will they join calls automatically?+

Each can connect to your calendar and join scheduled meetings on its own, so the notes happen without you remembering to start anything.

Meeting notes are one piece of a bigger setup. See our roundups of the best AI tools for team communication and for remote team management.

Eddie Ochieng

Eddie Ochieng

Eddie Ezekiel Ochieng is a software developer and the editor of The Test Card. He has been writing code since 2016 and has spent the last six years building production web applications for clients, work that runs from a non-profit’s platform to a community dictionary and a personal-safety service. He builds mostly in TypeScript, React and Next.js, with Node, Python and PostgreSQL behind them.

He started The Test Card out of mild irritation. Most AI tool coverage is written by people who never ship anything and never have to live with a bad tool choice. He does. The question that interests him is the practical one, which of these tools survive contact with real work, and which are just a subscription you forget to cancel.

He is not an AI researcher and does not pretend to be. What he brings instead is a builder’s scepticism, a habit of actually reading the documentation and the pricing page, and a bias toward simplicity over novelty. Good software, as he puts it, should feel as good as it works.

eddie-ezekiel.com

Leave a Comment

Share your thoughts about this article