Salesforce vs HubSpot: Choosing a CRM in 2026

Almost every comparison of Salesforce vs HubSpot you will find was written by a partner of one of them. That is not a conspiracy, it is an economic fact: the people who know these products well enough to compare them make their living implementing one. The result is a genre of article that gives one product its strongest case and the other a polite summary of its weaknesses.

We implement and integrate both, and we have moved clients in both directions. What follows is the comparison we would give a client who asked over a table, with the prices read off each vendor’s own pricing page in September 2026 and the platform limits read out of each vendor’s own documentation rather than recalled.

The short version is that the licence price, which is the thing every comparison leads with, is the smallest number in the decision. The two numbers that actually decide it are how much administration the system needs each month, and what it costs you to change your mind in year three.

Which is better, Salesforce or HubSpot? Neither, because they stopped being the same kind of product. HubSpot is an application you adopt and configure. Salesforce is a platform you build on, which is why it can model a revenue process no application anticipated and why it needs someone to own it. Choose HubSpot when your process fits contacts, companies and deals and your constraint is marketing throughput. Choose Salesforce when your revenue model has objects that are not deals and rules that must be enforced rather than encouraged.

Two Products That Are No Longer in the Same Category

In 2015 these were both CRM applications and the comparison was fair. They have diverged since, and the divergence predicts nearly everything downstream.

HubSpot is a product. It ships with an opinion about what a customer record is, what a pipeline looks like, and how marketing relates to sales. You configure inside that opinion. When the opinion matches your business, you get to value in weeks, because most of the decisions have already been made for you and made reasonably.

Salesforce is a platform with a CRM shipped on top of it. The data model is yours to define, the automation layer is general purpose, and there is a programming language, a deployment model and a release process underneath. When your business does something no vendor anticipated, that matters enormously. When it does not, you are administering a capability you never use.

Everything below follows from that split. The pricing models differ, the administration load differs, and the exit costs differ, because one product holds your data and the other holds your data and your logic.

The Strongest Case for HubSpot

Stated without hedging, because it is a genuinely strong case and most comparisons written by Salesforce partners understate it.

Time to value is the real product. A competent HubSpot rollout for a twenty person sales team is live in four to eight weeks including data migration. The equivalent Salesforce project is three to six months. In a business where the sales team is the constraint, that difference is worth more than any feature.

The interface is used. Adoption failure is the most common way a CRM project fails, and it fails quietly: the data goes stale, the forecast stops being believable, and eighteen months later somebody proposes replacing the system. HubSpot’s default screens are the ones reps actually fill in.

Marketing and CRM share one data model. Not an integration between two systems with a nightly sync and a reconciliation problem, one set of records. If your growth engine is content, email and forms, that single model removes an entire class of work that Salesforce customers pay an integration budget to solve.

And the pricing is legible. You can price a HubSpot deployment from a public web page without talking to anybody. That is rarer than it should be.

The business for which HubSpot is the correct answer: five to two hundred employees, one or two products, a sales process that fits a pipeline with stages, marketing that runs on email and content, and no revenue objects that are not deals.

The Strongest Case for Salesforce

Also stated without hedging.

Extensibility that does not run out. You can define objects the vendor never imagined, write server side logic against them, enforce validation the user cannot bypass, and expose the result through an API. When your business has contracts, assets, entitlements, territories, subscriptions or regulated approvals, these are first class objects with their own behaviour rather than fields bolted onto a deal.

There is a real development model. Salesforce Enterprise Edition includes twenty five Developer sandboxes and one Partial Copy sandbox, and Unlimited and Performance editions add Developer Pro and Full sandboxes, per Salesforce’s sandbox documentation . That is the shape of a system expected to be changed by engineers with source control and a release process.

Depth in complex sales. Multi step approvals, configure price quote rules, partner and channel hierarchies, revenue recognition and territory management exist as products rather than as workarounds. If your deals need a legal review at a threshold and a discount approval above another, Salesforce enforces it and HubSpot mostly reminds people.

And the ecosystem covers what you have not thought of yet. For anything unusual there is generally an AppExchange package, a consultancy that has done it before, and a labour market of people who already know the platform.

The business for which Salesforce is the correct answer: complex or regulated revenue processes, objects that are not deals, an existing engineering capability, or an acquisition strategy that means the data model will keep changing.

Salesforce vs HubSpot on Published Price

Both vendors publish list prices. Read them in the currency the vendor publishes, because converting a USD list price to GBP produces a number nobody will ever invoice you.

Salesforce publishes GBP on its UK pricing page. As of September 2026 it lists Sales Cloud at five levels : Starter Suite at £20 per user per month billed monthly or annually, Pro Suite at £80 billed annually, Enterprise at £140, Unlimited at £280, and Agentforce 1 Sales at £440. The page carries its own warning that it is provided for information purposes only and subject to change, which is worth taking literally.

HubSpot publishes USD on its main pricing pages. Sales Hub lists a free tier for up to two users, Starter at $7 per seat per month billed annually or $20 billed monthly, Professional at $90 billed annually or $100 monthly, and Enterprise from $150 per seat. Professional carries a required one time onboarding fee of $1,500 and Enterprise $3,500.

Two structural differences matter more than the headline figures. HubSpot’s view only and partner seats are free, so people who read the CRM but never edit it cost nothing, while Salesforce charges per user for anyone who touches it. Conversely, HubSpot charges separately for marketing capacity and Salesforce does not, which reverses the comparison the moment a marketing team is in scope.

The HubSpot Pricing Traps

HubSpot’s pricing is legible, which is not the same as simple. Three things surprise buyers.

The marketing contact ratchet

Marketing Hub is priced on marketing contacts, and the tiers step. HubSpot’s own product catalogue sets Professional at $890 per month with three core seats and 2,000 marketing contacts included, then charges per 5,000 contact block: $250 for the range from 2,001 to 22,000, $225 from 22,001 to 42,000, and less again above that. Enterprise starts at $3,600 per month with 10,000 contacts included and charges per 10,000 block, from $100 down to $60 as the volume rises.

The ratchet is in the timing, not the rate. HubSpot states that promoting contacts to marketing contacts takes effect immediately, that demoting them takes effect only at the start of the following month or at renewal, that contact tier pricing cannot be downgraded until your renewal date, and that exceeding your tier bills immediately. Cost goes up in real time and comes down once a year.

That asymmetry punishes exactly the behaviour a marketing team is rewarded for. One large list import or an over broad enrolment rule can move you a tier in an afternoon, and you carry it until renewal.

Onboarding is not optional

The $1,500 Professional and $3,500 Enterprise onboarding fees on Sales Hub, and the $3,000 and $7,000 fees on Marketing Hub, are described by HubSpot as required. Budget them as licence cost, not as services, because you cannot decline them and do the work yourself.

The Salesforce Pricing Traps

Salesforce’s traps are different in kind. The list price is real, but most quotes assume things the list price does not include.

The add-ons most quotes assume

The UK pricing page lists Agentforce for Sales from £100 per user per month, Sales Programs from £80, Revenue Intelligence from £176, Revenue Cloud from £160 and Partner Relationship Management from £8 per login per month. Several of these are routinely included in a proposal because the reference architecture assumes them. A £140 Enterprise seat with Agentforce for Sales attached is a £240 seat.

Success plans are a percentage, not a price

The Standard Success Plan is included with all licences and is self service. The Premier Success Plan, which is what most organisations mean when they say they have Salesforce support, costs 30% of net licence fees and is bundled into Unlimited Edition.

Do the arithmetic before you buy Unlimited. Enterprise at £140 plus Premier at 30% is £182 per user per month. Unlimited at £280 bundles Premier and adds Predictive AI, Sales Engagement and a Full sandbox. Whether that £98 difference is worth it is a real question, and it is one nobody asks because the two numbers are never presented side by side.

The percentage structure also means support cost scales with headcount rather than with support consumed, which suits a large team on a simple configuration badly.

Three Year Cost of Ownership at Twenty Seats

This is where the answer usually flips, so it is worth modelling properly. Take a UK firm with twenty sales seats, no separate marketing platform, and a moderately clean existing dataset.

Over three years, HubSpot Sales Hub Professional at $90 per seat billed annually costs $64,800 in licence, plus the $1,500 onboarding fee, giving $66,300 in USD. Salesforce Enterprise at £140 per user costs £100,800 in GBP over the same period. Salesforce Pro Suite at £80 would be £57,600, but Pro Suite does not include the web API that most integration work needs. Our note on Salesforce implementation cost and timeline breaks the services side down further.

Where the services cost diverges

The services figures below are our own UK agency bands, not vendor published numbers.

The licence rows are in the currency each vendor publishes and are deliberately not converted. In prose: HubSpot implementation lands between £8,000 and £20,000 against £25,000 to £70,000 for Salesforce, data migration costs roughly the same either way because it depends on your source data rather than your target, training is two to three times more expensive on Salesforce, and administration over three years runs £36,000 to £72,000 on HubSpot against £108,000 to £216,000 on Salesforce. Administration is the largest single line on both sides, and on Salesforce it exceeds the licence.

Three Year Cost of Ownership at Eighty Seats

Scale changes the shape. Take eighty sales seats plus a marketing team running to 120,000 marketing contacts.

On HubSpot, Sales Hub Enterprise at $150 per seat is $432,000 over three years. Marketing Hub Enterprise at $3,600 per month adds $129,600, and the two onboarding fees add $10,500. The marketing contacts above the included 10,000 are billed on the blended tier: four blocks at $100, five at $90 and two at $80 comes to $1,010 per month, or $36,360 over three years. Total published licence cost is roughly $608,000 in USD.

On Salesforce, eighty Enterprise seats at £140 is £403,200. Add Agentforce for Sales at £100 per user for twenty of them and that is £72,000 more. Add Premier Success at 30% of net licence fees and that is a further £120,960. Total is roughly £596,000 in GBP.

At this size the licence figures converge, and the decision moves entirely onto the things the price list does not show: how many people it takes to run, how quickly you can change it, and what happens to the marketing consent record when the marketing platform is the same system as the CRM.

Note also what the marketing contact arithmetic implies. Growing that list from 120,000 to 200,000 costs another $640 per month, and you cannot reduce it again until renewal.

The Administration Question That Usually Decides It

Say this plainly, because vendors will not. HubSpot needs a part time administrator. Salesforce frequently needs a dedicated one.

You can read the expectation straight off the configuration limits. Salesforce Enterprise Edition allows 200 custom objects, 500 custom fields per object against an organisation ceiling of 900 fields per object type, 100 active validation rules per object, 300 sharing rules per object, 1,000 permission sets and 4,000 flows of which 2,000 may be active. A system that permits 2,000 active automations is a system that expects somebody to know what all of them do.

HubSpot Enterprise, by contrast, allows ten custom object definitions, one million custom object records and fifty custom object pipelines, with a limit increase pack at $500 per month adding ten more objects and a million more records. Its change management expectation is visible in the sandbox pricing: Enterprise includes one standard sandbox and an additional one costs $750 per month.

In practice, a twenty seat HubSpot deployment needs two to four administrator days a month. The equivalent Salesforce deployment needs six to twelve. Somewhere between fifty and eighty Salesforce seats, that becomes a full time job, and the organisations that refuse to fund it are the ones whose Salesforce instance quietly rots.

If you cannot name the person who will own the system, you have already chosen HubSpot whether you meant to or not.

What You Can Actually Change in Each Product

The word customisation covers two different activities and the difference matters.

On HubSpot you configure. You add properties to standard objects, build pipelines and stages, write workflows in a visual builder, and on Enterprise you define custom objects. Custom objects are Enterprise only, which is the single most consequential tier gate in the product: if your data model needs an object that is not a contact, company, deal or ticket, your entry price is Enterprise.

On Salesforce you configure and then you build. The same declarative surface exists and is broader, and underneath it there is Apex for server side logic, Lightning Web Components for interface work, and a metadata layer that can be version controlled and deployed between environments. Validation rules are enforced at the platform level, so a record that violates one cannot be saved by any route including the API.

The practical test is whether your requirement is a rule or a preference. HubSpot is excellent at encouraging behaviour and weak at forbidding it. Salesforce can forbid it. Where a missing field is a compliance failure rather than an inconvenience, that distinction is the whole decision.

For behaviour neither product ships, you are writing software against an API, and that is custom software development regardless of which CRM sits underneath it.

Where Each One Hits a Wall

Both have ceilings, and knowing where they are is more useful than knowing what the products can do.

HubSpot’s wall is the data model. Objects, associations and reporting are shaped around a marketing and sales motion. When you need a many to many relationship with attributes on the join, or an object whose lifecycle is not a pipeline, you start building shadow structures out of properties and workflows. Those work, and are unmaintainable within two years. The second wall is enforcement: workflows run after the fact, so a rule implemented as a workflow is a correction rather than a constraint.

Salesforce’s wall is cost of change, in two forms. The first is governor limits: transactions are bounded, so logic that works on one record can fail in a bulk update, and custom code carries a test burden. The second is organisational. Once several teams own automation in one org, changing anything requires knowing what else fires, and that knowledge lives in one or two people.

There is a third wall neither vendor mentions. Both degrade badly when nobody owns data quality, and the failure then looks like a product problem rather than a process one. Our build versus buy guide for CRM and ERP covers that ground.

Integration and APIs, With the Real Limits

Both have APIs, which tells you nothing. The models differ in a way that changes architecture.

Salesforce meters a total request allocation per rolling twenty four hours. Salesforce’s developer limits reference sets Enterprise Edition at 100,000 requests plus 1,000 per Salesforce licence, so an eighty seat org gets 180,000 calls a day. REST, SOAP, Bulk API and most Connect REST calls all draw on that same pool. Concurrent inbound requests running twenty seconds or longer are capped at 25 in production, and the REST and SOAP timeout is ten minutes. Additional capacity is purchasable in increments.

HubSpot meters two things at once. HubSpot’s usage guidelines give Free and Starter accounts 250,000 requests a day, Professional 625,000 and Enterprise 1,000,000, with a burst limit of 190 requests per ten seconds for private apps on paid tiers. The API Limit Increase add on at $500 per month adds a million calls a day and raises the burst ceiling to 250 per ten seconds, with a maximum of two packs. Publicly distributed OAuth apps get 110 requests per ten seconds per installing account and the add on does not raise it.

The design consequence: on HubSpot the daily allowance is generous and the ten second burst limit is what breaks your sync, so you throttle. On Salesforce the daily pool is the binding constraint and it is shared across every integration you own, so you batch. We cover the Salesforce side in detail in Salesforce integration limits and real cost .

Reporting and What Happens as the Data Model Grows

Reporting is fine on both until the data model grows, and then they fail differently.

HubSpot’s reporting is fast to build and constrained by its object graph. Reports across two or three related objects are straightforward. Reports that require an aggregate over an object that does not exist, or a time dimension the platform does not track, require you to precompute the answer into a property with a workflow. That works, and it means your report now depends on an automation that somebody must maintain and that silently produces wrong numbers if it stops.

Salesforce’s reporting is more capable and slower to use. Report types must be defined before a report can be built across objects, and a formula field that is convenient in a report can be expensive at scale. The compensation is that the query language reaches anything in the model, so an analyst can extract what the report builder will not give them.

The asymmetry appears when you want your data somewhere else. Salesforce exposes a general query interface and a bulk interface designed for exactly that. HubSpot exposes object APIs and a growing set of exports, and the shape of what you get out is the shape of what it stores. If your reporting endpoint is a warehouse rather than the CRM, plan the pipeline before you choose the CRM, not after. That is the same lesson as in CRM and ERP integration .

Migrating In: What Actually Moves

Records move. Everything else is a rebuild, and this is where migration budgets are wrong.

Contacts, companies, deals and their properties migrate cleanly given a mapping and a deduplication rule. Activity history migrates with effort and usually with loss, because the source system’s idea of a logged call or an email thread rarely maps one to one. Attachments migrate if you plan for them.

Nothing else moves. Automations, reports and email templates are rebuilt. Permissions are redesigned, because the two products model access differently enough that a translation is meaningless. Integrations are rewritten against a different API with different limits.

The number that matters is the ratio. On a typical mid sized migration, moving the data is twenty to thirty percent of the work and rebuilding behaviour is the rest. Quotes that price the data movement and describe the rest as configuration are the reason migrations overrun. Our guide to writing a software RFP that gets useful quotes covers how to word the scope so the rebuild is priced.

Budget six to sixteen weeks of elapsed time for a twenty seat migration and four to nine months for an eighty seat one, in both directions.

Migrating Out of Salesforce

Nobody writes this section, which is why it is the most valuable one here. Start with Salesforce because its exit is better documented and, in one specific way, worse than it looks.

Salesforce’s data export service produces a ZIP archive of CSV files. Weekly export is available on Enterprise, Performance and Unlimited editions and monthly on the rest, and manual generation is limited to once every seven days or once every twenty nine. Archives are capped at approximately 512 MB each, so large orgs get several. The files are deleted forty eight hours after the notification email, not counting weekends, and you may download one at a time with a sixty second wait between each.

Three exclusions matter. Formula fields and roll up summary fields are always excluded, so any value your business computes on the platform arrives as a hole you must recompute. Chatter posts and comments are truncated at 1,000 characters. And the export service does not run in sandboxes, so you cannot rehearse it where you rehearse everything else.

More importantly, the export gives you data and not logic. Apex classes, flows, validation rules, page layouts, permission sets and approval processes live in metadata, retrievable through the Metadata API and worthless to any other vendor. Every rule your business encoded over five years leaves as an artefact nobody else can read.

Realistic cost to leave Salesforce for a mid sized org: £30,000 to £90,000 in services, plus overlapping licences for the changeover period.

Migrating Out of HubSpot

HubSpot’s exit is easier for data and harder for everything that made the platform attractive.

The data comes out. Records, properties, property history, invoices, quotes, subscriptions, workflow metadata, SEO data, URL redirects and web content are all exportable, and HubSpot documents the full list . Note that exporting all your contacts includes unsubscribes unless you filter them out, which becomes a data protection problem if you import that file somewhere else uncritically.

Two things do not come out in a usable form. Workflow exports are a spreadsheet describing your workflows, name, active state, enrolment counts, creation date and type, and HubSpot states plainly that they do not include performance data or the workflow’s history. You can export images of individual workflows. That is a screenshot of your business logic, not a copy of it.

The second is worse and is easy to miss until the day you cancel. HubSpot notes that all HubSpot forms lose their paid features once your account is deactivated, and that legacy calls to action stop functioning entirely, advising customers to replace embedded forms before cancelling. If your website has HubSpot forms embedded across fifty landing pages, leaving HubSpot is a website project as well as a CRM project.

HubSpot also states there is no way to merge all the data between HubSpot accounts, which surprises companies going through a merger.

Realistic cost to leave HubSpot: £15,000 to £50,000 in services, plus whatever the website work costs.

AI Features and How They Are Actually Charged

Both ship AI. Both charge for it by consumption, and the consumption units are where the marketing stops being useful.

Salesforce sells Agentforce on Flex Credits. The published rate is £400 GBP per 100,000 credits, with a standard agent action costing 20 credits and a voice action 30. That is eight pence per standard action at the GBP rate. There is an alternative per conversation model at £1.60 GBP, and Salesforce states that Flex Credits and Conversations are not supported in the same org, so you pick one. The Agentforce 1 Sales edition at £440 per user per month includes one million Flex Credits per org per year, which at 20 credits per action is 50,000 actions annually across the whole organisation.

HubSpot sells the same idea as HubSpot Credits, at $0.010 per credit, with capacity packs at $10 per 1,000 credits per month. Credits reset monthly and do not roll over. Included allowances are 500 credits on Starter, 3,000 on Professional and 5,000 on Enterprise. Consumption is published: 10 credits for a Breeze action in a workflow, 50 credits for a customer agent conversation resolved, 100 credits for a prospecting agent outreach recommendation.

Run those numbers before believing anything else. An Enterprise account’s 5,000 included credits buys 100 resolved customer agent conversations a month, or 50 prospecting recommendations. Both vendors publish outcome claims, HubSpot’s pricing page for instance attributing more than 70% automatic conversation resolution to its customer agent. Treat those as vendor claims, not as findings. We wrote about the Salesforce side of this in what Agentforce actually costs , and if you are weighing whether to buy agent features or build against a model API directly, that is the subject of our AI integration work .

Where Your CRM Data Sits, and Why UK Buyers Should Care

A CRM is a database of personal data about identifiable people, so where it is processed is a procurement question and not an IT detail.

HubSpot hosts on AWS. Its hosting FAQ lists regions in the United States East (Virginia) and West (Oregon), Canada (Montreal), Australia (Sydney) and the European Union (Germany). There is no UK region. Accounts are assigned a data centre by the IP geolocation of whoever signs up, which means a UK company whose finance director bought the subscription while travelling can end up hosted in the wrong place by accident. Paid subscriptions can change data centre. HubSpot also states that analytics and usage data is transferred to the United States, and that sub processors may process data outside your hosting location.

Salesforce can offer UK residency. Salesforce states that as of 31 July 2026 Hyperforce is available on AWS in eighteen countries including the UK, that local storage means customer data is stored at rest in the country and Salesforce will not relocate it, but that data can still be transferred out for processing. Greater control over that is sold separately as the Hyperforce Operating Zone.

If UK data residency is a contractual requirement from your own customers, that asymmetry may end the comparison.

PECR, Marketing Consent and the Constraint HubSpot Users Miss

This one catches HubSpot customers specifically, because HubSpot makes marketing to your CRM contacts the point of the product.

Under PECR, the electronic mail marketing rule does not apply to corporate subscribers, so you may email a company address without PECR consent. But the ICO is explicit that sole traders, most English, Welsh and Northern Irish partnerships that are not limited liability partnerships, and other unincorporated bodies count as individual subscribers. Those need consent, or all four soft opt in conditions: details obtained during a sale or negotiation of a sale, similar products only, a clear chance to opt out when collected, and an opt out in every message.

Your CRM does not know which of your contacts is a sole trader. That is the gap. HubSpot’s marketing contact flag is a billing construct, it means a contact can be sent marketing email and be billed for, and it records nothing about lawful basis. Consent has to live in a separate property that somebody maintains, and the two drift.

Two further points. The ICO notes that tracking pixels in marketing email engage the PECR rules on cookies and similar technologies for all subscriber types, and open tracking is a pixel. And the ICO can issue a monetary penalty of up to £500,000 , against the organisation or its directors. That guidance is currently under review following the Data (Use and Access) Act, so check it again before you rely on it.

A Decision Rule You Can Actually Apply

Answer four questions honestly and the choice usually makes itself.

Does your revenue process contain objects that are not deals? Contracts with renewal terms, assets under warranty, entitlements, territories, subscriptions with usage. If yes, Salesforce, and if you are on HubSpot you need Enterprise for custom objects anyway.

Do you need rules enforced or encouraged? If a missing field is a compliance failure rather than an annoyance, you need platform level validation. If it is an annoyance, a workflow reminder is fine and cheaper.

Can you name the person who will administer it? Not a job title, a person, with capacity. If you cannot, choose the system that survives neglect better, which is HubSpot.

Is marketing throughput or process complexity your constraint? One data model for marketing and CRM is worth a great deal to the first and almost nothing to the second.

And here is the observation that most comparisons are too polite to make. The wrong choice implemented well, owned by somebody, with clean data and adopted by the team, beats the right choice implemented badly every single time. We have seen more value destroyed by unowned Salesforce instances than by HubSpot deployments that outgrew their data model. Deployment quality dominates product choice by a wide margin, and it is the variable you control.

Getting the Decision Right

If you are weighing this now, the useful work is not another feature comparison. It is modelling three years of real cost including administration, testing whether your revenue objects fit a pipeline, and pricing the exit before you sign the entry.

Mecanik implements and integrates both platforms for UK clients, and we are equally happy telling you not to buy either. Our software development team builds the integrations and custom objects that make a CRM fit an unusual revenue model, and our AI integration service covers whether the agent features earn their credit cost against building on a model API directly. If you are inheriting a CRM through an acquisition, technical due diligence covers what to look at first.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is HubSpot cheaper than Salesforce? On licence, usually yes at small scale and roughly comparable at large scale. HubSpot Sales Hub Professional is published at $90 per seat per month billed annually, while Salesforce Enterprise is published at £140 per user per month on the UK site. But at eighty seats with marketing included, three year published licence cost lands near $608,000 for HubSpot and near £596,000 for Salesforce. Administration cost, not licence cost, is what usually decides the total.

Which is better for a UK small or medium business? HubSpot, in most cases. If your sales process fits contacts, companies and deals, your growth engine is content and email, and you cannot name a person with capacity to administer a CRM, HubSpot will be live faster and stay usable longer. Choose Salesforce when your revenue model contains objects that are not deals, when rules must be enforced rather than encouraged, or when UK data residency is a contractual requirement.

How hard is it to migrate from HubSpot to Salesforce or the other way? Records migrate cleanly. Automations, reports, permissions, templates and integrations are rebuilt, and that rebuild is typically seventy to eighty percent of the work. Expect six to sixteen weeks for twenty seats and four to nine months for eighty, in either direction. Leaving HubSpot has an extra cost most plans miss, because HubSpot forms lose their paid features and legacy calls to action stop working when the account is deactivated.

What are the API limits for Salesforce and HubSpot? Salesforce Enterprise Edition allows 100,000 API requests per twenty four hours plus 1,000 per Salesforce licence, shared across REST, SOAP, Bulk and most Connect REST calls, with concurrent long running requests capped at 25 in production. HubSpot allows 625,000 requests a day on Professional and 1,000,000 on Enterprise, with a burst limit of 190 requests per ten seconds for private apps. An add on at $500 per month adds a million daily calls and raises the burst limit to 250.

Does using HubSpot create a PECR compliance problem? Not by itself, but it creates a gap that is easy to miss. The ICO treats sole traders and most non limited liability partnerships as individual subscribers, so they need consent or the soft opt in, while companies and limited liability partnerships do not. HubSpot’s marketing contact flag is a billing construct and records nothing about lawful basis, so consent must be tracked in a separate property. The ICO can fine up to £500,000, against the organisation or its directors.