Reply.io vs Woodpecker
Opposite ends of the price spectrum. Woodpecker charges per contacted prospect from $35/mo, with unlimited mailboxes throughout. Reply starts at $179 a month. Both allow unlimited mailboxes; only one lets you find out whether outbound works for you before paying anything.
Reply.io
Multichannel sales engagement with an AI SDR, priced well above the cold-email field.
Woodpecker
Usage-based cold email priced on contacted prospects, with unlimited mailboxes.
| Feature | Reply.io | Woodpecker |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.3 | 4.2 |
| Starting price | $179/momonthly billing; $159/mo billed annually (~17% off) | $35/mousage-based: $35/mo for 500 contacted prospects ($7.00 per 100) |
| Free trial | Yes | Yes |
| Email accounts | Unlimited (fair usage policy) | Unlimited |
| Active contacts | 10,000/mo (Email Volume entry) | — |
| Warmup included | Yes | Included with paid usage, more as add-ons |
| Inbox rotation | Yes | — |
| Multichannel | LinkedIn, calls, SMS, WhatsApp | LinkedIn (paid add-on), manual calls/SMS |
| Live data credits | 50/month included | — |
| Team members | — | Unlimited |
| Entry tier | — | 500 prospects — 8,000 emails/mo, 2,000 stored |
Hands-on field test
In progressWe plan to run identical 200-contact campaigns from freshly warmed mailboxes on each platform (same copy, same sending window, same domains) and measure inbox-placement rate via seed tests, plus bounce and reply rates. Until that runs we quote no deliverability figures.
The verdict
Woodpecker is the obvious choice for low or uneven volume — usage-based pricing that tracks what you actually send, at a fraction of the entry cost. Reply is the choice once outreach is a staffed function needing multiple channels, unlimited users and a data layer. There is very little middle ground between them, which makes this an unusually clear decision.
Choose Reply.io if outbound is a team function with multiple channels and you want it all in one platform. Choose Woodpecker if you are testing, running low or seasonal volume, or want unlimited mailboxes and seats at no cost.
Reply.io vs Woodpecker: FAQs
- Which is cheaper to start?
- Woodpecker, decisively — $35/mo for 500 contacted prospects against Reply's $179/mo. Both offer a 14-day trial. NOTE: we previously recorded a standing free tier here. As of 2026-08-11 the vendor no longer shows one — the prospect selector starts at 500 and the page sells a 14-day trial instead.
- Do both do LinkedIn?
- Both, as paid extras. Woodpecker sells LinkedIn outreach as an add-on; Reply charges $69 per account per month for LinkedIn on its Email Volume plan, though it is included on Multichannel.
- How predictable is each bill?
- Reply is a flat monthly fee. Woodpecker charges per contacted prospect — $35/mo for 500, at $7.00 per 100 — so the bill moves with volume.
- Which allows more mailboxes?
- Both advertise unlimited, but Woodpecker's applies at every usage level with no stated condition, while Reply's is governed by a Fair Usage Policy tied to your active-contact limit.
Comparing more than two?
Put Reply.io, Woodpecker and up to two others side by side on price, mailboxes, warmup and trials.
Open the comparison table →