Decision Support · Side-by-side
Compare pricing, strengths, and use cases so it is easier to pick the right fit.
Change tools
For most everyday users, OnSite is the clear winner because it can be set up in minutes with just a website URL and some documents, while Hatch is a heavy-duty sales tool that requires a team and a budget. The single biggest difference: OnSite is a plug-and-play chatbot you can deploy yourself, whereas Hatch is a full-service AI sales agent that needs professional onboarding and integration.
Hatch
OnSite
Scores at a glance
Choose Hatch if
Choose OnSite if
Key differences
Facts side by side
| Hatch | OnSite | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | ||
| Mobile app | ||
| API access |
Common questions
No. OnSite is better because you can set it up yourself in minutes by pointing it at your website and product PDFs. Hatch requires a sales team and a budget you likely don't have.
No, OnSite doesn't have a mobile app. But the chatbot you create works on mobile browsers for your customers — you just can't manage it from your phone easily.
No. Hatch depends on CRM data and lead source information to function. If you don't have a CRM with clean data, it won't be effective.
OnSite is likely cheaper because it has a free tier (though limited) and doesn't require a setup team. Hatch's pricing is hidden and almost certainly too expensive for a freelancer.
Only Hatch can make voice calls. OnSite is text-only — it can't call or speak to anyone.
OnSite wins for everyday users with its 5-minute setup and document-based chatbot; Hatch is a powerful but expensive sales tool for teams with dedicated support.
If you're a regular person or small business owner who just wants a smart chatbot on your website without hiring a team, go with OnSite — it's fast, easy, and works with your existing content. Hatch is only worth considering if you run a sales operation with a CRM and a budget for professional AI setup.
