Contactful vs LinkedHelper
A deeper comparison: Contactful is built for relationship memory (notes, tags, pipelines, clean exports). LinkedHelper is built for automation campaigns (sequences, auto-actions) that typically run from a desktop client. Choose the tool that matches your risk tolerance and your workflow style.
Who each tool is for
These products can both help on LinkedIn, but they optimize for different outcomes. Use this section as a fast filter before going into the feature matrix.
Contactful
LinkedIn CRM- Recruiters who need pipelines, stages, and candidate context
- Sales/BDR who do manual outreach but need clean follow-up lists
- Founders/execs managing relationships with notes + tags
- People who want a local-first tool (data stays with you)
Focus: Save → Tag → Pipeline → Follow up. You build a searchable relationship memory.
LinkedHelper
Automation- Users who want automated outreach sequences at scale
- Teams running campaign-like flows (invite → message → follow-up)
- People who accept higher operational complexity for more volume
- Workflows built around automated actions vs manual relationship management
Focus: Campaign execution. You optimize volume and automation logic.
Deep feature matrix
This compares practical day-to-day capability, not marketing claims. Use it to decide what breaks first for your use case: missing CRM depth, missing automation depth, compliance risk, or data ownership.
| Category | Contactful | LinkedHelper |
|---|---|---|
| Core value | Relationship memory (notes, tags, pipelines) | Automation campaigns (sequences & auto-actions) |
| Pipelines & stages | Built-in pipelines for recruiting + sales | Not the primary model (campaign-first) |
| Notes quality | Designed for context-rich notes & follow-ups | Notes exist but not usually the “source of truth” |
| Tags & segmentation | Fast tagging + filtering for shortlists | Segmentation often oriented around campaigns |
| Automation (messages, invites) | No automation by design | Core capability |
| Compliance / risk profile | Manual workflow (lower automation risk) | Automation can increase platform risk if abused |
| Data ownership | Local-first approach, export-friendly | Depends on setup; campaign systems can be harder to migrate |
| Where it runs | Chrome extension + web app | Commonly desktop-driven automation |
| Export / portability | Clean CSV/Excel exports for reporting/CRM | Exports possible, but often campaign-oriented |
| Best workflow fit | High-context relationships, careful follow-up | High-volume outreach, repeatable sequences |
If your biggest pain is “I forget who this person is / what we agreed / when to follow up”, that’s CRM pain. If your biggest pain is “I can’t reach enough people consistently”, that’s automation pain.
Use-case decision guide
Pick the scenario closest to your reality. This is the fastest way to decide without overthinking features.
Choose Contactful if you…
CRM-first- Run recruiting or sales with multiple parallel pipelines
- Need strong notes to keep context across months
- Want tag-based shortlists you can export to clients / ATS / CRM
- Prefer a workflow that feels safe and intentional (manual follow-ups)
Choose LinkedHelper if you…
Automation- Need automated sequences (invites + follow-ups)
- Operate in a campaign model with templates and steps
- Measure success primarily by volume and throughput
- Accept more configuration and operational overhead
FAQ
Answers to the questions people usually ask when comparing CRM tools to automation tools.