Home / Directory / Agents & orchestration / Agent platforms & frameworks / Relevance AI
Relevance AI
No-/low-code AI agent workforce platform for building multi-agent business workflows with actions, tools, and team collaboration. Relevance AI raised a $24 million Series B in May 2025.
Operators and GTM or ops teams that want a workforce-style agent builder with published Action and credit packaging.
Teams that need a code-first framework with full OSS control, or enterprises that only buy through a heavy CCaaS suite RFP.
Co-founded by Daniel Vassilev.
Verdict
Relevance AI fits teams that want a no-code agent workforce for day-to-day business workflows without standing up LangChain from scratch. Public pricing starts free, then Pro around $19-$29 per month and Team around $234-$349 depending on annual versus monthly billing, with Action and vendor-credit meters. Builders like the speed; watch credit burn and whether multi-agent enterprise needs push you into sales-led packaging.
Score Breakdown
How Relevance AI scores in the categories that matter to its buyers.
Pricing
Relevance AI publishes Free, Pro, Team, and Enterprise plans on relevanceai.com. Prices below are USD from the public rate card as of September 2026; annual billing discounts Pro and Team.
| Plan | Price | What stands out |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 / mo | 200 Actions/mo; starter vendor credits; unlimited agents/tools |
| Pro | $19-$29 / mo | 2,500 Actions/mo; ~10k vendor credits; BYOK; top-ups available |
| Team | $234-$349 / mo | 7,000 Actions/mo; higher credits; collaboration features |
| Enterprise | Sales quote | Custom Actions/credits, SSO/RBAC, multi-region, SLAs |
The Field at a Glance
How Relevance AI compares with other Agent platforms & frameworks vendors we reviewed, by Overall Score and relative typical engagement cost.
Relevance AI scores 6.7 in Agent platforms & frameworks, under LangChain (8.0), Gumloop (7.8), Kore.ai (7.5), and Dust (6.8). Relative cost lands mid-band for this subcategory.
Use-case matrix
| Use case | Fit | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Business multi-agent workflows | Strong | Core workforce-OS pitch. |
| No-code agent building | Strong | Primary UX. |
| Code-first agent frameworks | Mixed | The APIs help, and the product does not replace LangChain. |
| Regulated CCaaS suite replacement | Poor | Relevance AI is an agent platform and does not replace a contact-center suite. |
Review Excerpts
Excerpts from company materials and public coverage of Relevance AI, plus representative buyer views drawn from public information. Paid reviews and pay-for-play sites were excluded.
“We stood up multi-agent workflows for research and operations tasks without writing a custom orchestration stack, then wired tools into the apps we already use.”
Representative buyer view
“Bringing our own LLM keys keeps model spend visible and out of platform fees.”
Representative buyer view
“Complex multi-agent setups still need hands-on workflow design, and credit use climbs fast when tool loops run verbose.”
Representative buyer view
Where customer reviews couldn't be found, our analysts attempted to give a voice to buyer sentiment, drawing on real information from review sites, forums, and product documentation.
Based on: Relevance AI’s website and Relevance AI’s Series B announcement
Company Facts
- Founded
- 2020 (CB Insights)
- Headquarters
- Surry Hills, New South Wales, Australia (CB Insights)
- Total funding raised
- $37M (CB Insights)
- Key investors
- Meliora Ventures, Insight Partners, King River Capital, Peak XV Partners, Bessemer Venture Partners (CB Insights)
- Customers
- Mirvac, Roku, Asahi, Tennis Australia and Nine (CB Insights)
- Website
- relevance.ai
Key Leadership
Daniel Vassilev
Co-founder and co-CEO
Methodology
This page is an independent evaluation of Relevance AI for buyers comparing options in agent platforms & frameworks. AI Industry Reviews accepts no sponsorships, advertising, or pay-for-placement fees. Relevance AI did not pay for this review.
What we scored
The headline number is an Overall Score on a 0-10 scale. Eight criteria fall under it in two groups.
- Buyer outcomes (for agent platforms & frameworks)
- No-code multi-agent builder
- Business workflow automation
- Integrations & tools
- Seat / credit clarity
- Company & commercial
- Innovation & product leadership
- Project management & communication
- Pricing
- Contract fairness
Pricing measures whether the price looks fair for the value delivered, including packaging and renewal friction that show up in real buying cycles.
Score Composition
| Input | Weight | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 40% | A proprietary read of what practitioners say about likes, complaints, and day-to-day use, including public review sites, forums, and private chat rooms. Paid reviews and pay-for-play sites are out of scope. |
| Product | 35% | Hands-on look at screens and workflows. |
| Pricing | 15% | Whether the price looks fair for what you get. |
| Docs & training | 10% | Docs, tutorials, and training material. |
How we balanced the evidence
The Overall Score is the simple average of the eight criteria. Recommendation language follows that score and the use-case matrix above.
Scope
Relevance AI is graded here as agent platforms & frameworks. Criteria scores can move as more review volume and product checks are added.