Both take AI meeting notes, but their approaches are opposite. Granola puts no bot in the call; it captures your computer's audio and cleans up the notes you take. Otter writes everything into its own transcript archive and builds a searchable knowledge base. Short answer: Granola for client calls, Otter for a team-wide searchable archive.
The details below come from both tools' own pages and independent 2026 comparisons; all sourced. I'm a Granola affiliate, but I name clearly where Otter is the stronger pick too.
Bot or no bot — that's the real difference
Granola doesn't add a visible participant to the call; it captures your computer's system audio directly, so the other side doesn't see a 'recording' bot. Otter (like Fathom, Fireflies, tl;dv) joins the meeting as a bot. For client and external calls that difference is big: most of the time you don't want a bot at the table.
When Otter is the better pick
Let's be fair: if you treat meeting notes as a team-wide searchable knowledge base, Otter has no real competition. If you want to search across every past call, share, and build institutional memory, Otter is strong. Granola is more for the 'human-in-the-room' scenario — when personal note quality and being bot-free come first.
| Granola | Otter | |
|---|---|---|
| Bot joins call | No | Yes |
| Free plan | Last 25 notes | Limited |
| Approach | Cleans up your notes | Its own transcript archive |
| Strongest at | Bot-free client calls | Searchable knowledge base |
Which one is for you?
If client and external calls dominate, you care about personal note quality, and you don't want a bot at the table: Granola. If you use meeting notes as a team-wide searchable archive: Otter. For most founders and consultants, being bot-free alone is reason enough for Granola.
Try bot-free AI notes in your next meeting.
Download Granola through my link and run it in your next call — start free, at no extra cost to you.