Quick.Bot vs Typebot for WhatsApp

Both tools are visual flow builders for chat, and Typebot’s builder is the strongest of the group: open source, self-hostable, with a payment block of its own. The decision between them is not really about the builder. It comes down to two things: what happens after the bot hands the conversation to a person, and whether you want to run the software yourself or have it run for you.

At a glance

The inbox is the real difference

Typebot does not document a shared inbox. That is not an oversight, it is what the product is: a flow builder. The consequence shows up the first time a customer asks something the flow does not answer and a person has to take over. The usual answer in the Typebot world is to add Chatwoot next to it, which means two subscriptions, two products to learn, two places to look when something breaks, and a handoff that travels across an integration between them.

Quick.Bot includes the shared inbox from Starter: assignment, a clear owner per conversation, and handoff from the bot to a person carrying the full transcript, inside the same product that runs the flow. Nothing crosses an integration, because there is no second product on the other side. If you want the longer version of that argument, the case for a built-in inbox and the Typebot plus Chatwoot handoff walkthrough both go through it step by step.

Open source versus managed

Typebot can be self-hosted. That is a real advantage and we do not offer it: Quick.Bot is managed, and there is no version of it you run on your own server. If you need the code on your infrastructure, for a data residency rule or because you want to modify it, Typebot wins that requirement outright and nothing below changes it.

What self-hosting costs is not the license, it is the operation: the server, the upgrades, the database, the backups and the hour on a Saturday when the webhook stops arriving. The self-hosted cost checklist lists what that adds up to, and the VPS versus managed cloud comparison puts numbers on both sides. Pick self-hosting because you want control, not because you expect it to be free.

What the price difference actually buys

Be clear about this one: at 10,000 chats a month Typebot Cloud Pro is $89/month and Quick.Bot Scale is $149/month. Typebot is cheaper per chat at that volume, about $0.0089 against $0.0149, and the gap is $60 a month. If you only need a flow builder, you are paying us more for something you will not use.

What the extra $60 buys is the shared inbox, ten agent seats on Scale rather than a builder seat, and Mercado Pago inside the chat. Payments are otherwise a tie: both have a native payment block and both charge through Stripe, so the only real difference there is the Latin American method. Meta’s per-message bill is separate in both cases, and from 1 October 2026 it also covers service messages, with 1,000 free service messages per number per month.

Where Typebot is the better choice

If you want to self-host, Typebot is the answer and this page ends there. It is also the better choice if the builder is the whole job: a lead form, a quiz, a calculator, a flow embedded on a site where nobody is going to take over the conversation. It is open source, it is cheaper per chat at volume, and the flow editor is more powerful than ours. A solo operator who answers WhatsApp from the phone app and just needs a bot in front of it does not need what we charge extra for.

Frequently asked questions

Does Typebot have a shared inbox?

Typebot does not document one. It is a flow builder, so teams that need agents to take over a conversation usually run Chatwoot alongside it and connect the two. That means two subscriptions and a handoff that crosses an integration. Quick.Bot includes the shared inbox from its Starter plan, at $49/month, in the same product that runs the flow.

Is Quick.Bot cheaper than Typebot?

Not per chat. At 10,000 chats a month Typebot Cloud Pro is $89/month and Quick.Bot Scale is $149/month, so Typebot is cheaper at that volume. The comparison changes once you add what a team needs on top of a builder: the shared inbox, ten seats, and in-chat payments through Mercado Pago as well as Stripe. Meta charges per delivered message on top, in both cases.

Can I self-host Quick.Bot the way I self-host Typebot?

No. Quick.Bot is a managed product only, and Typebot is open source and self-hostable. If running the software on your own infrastructure is a requirement, Typebot meets it and Quick.Bot does not. Migrating either way means rebuilding the flows, because the two do not share a flow format, plus reconnecting the number and repointing the webhook.

Try Quick.Bot free, or read the wider comparison of WhatsApp chatbot platforms.