Skip to content
Sign in Submit your app

Caddygo vs Referee.chat

A side-by-side comparison built from both listings. Blank cells mean the company has not given that detail; we never guess.

Caddygo compared with Referee.chat
DetailCaddygo logo CaddygoReferee.chat logo Referee.chat
What it doesAI agents for procurement that work inside Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace An AI panel debates your goal; a referee rules on re-checkable evidence
StageNot given Not given
FoundedNot given Not given
Based inDE Not given
Pricing modelPaid Freemium
PricingStarter: €295/month for up to 20 sourcing events/year; Growth: €645/month for up to 50 sourcing events/year; Scale: €1,195/month for up to 100 sourcing events/year; Enterprise: custom pricing for 100+ events/year. All plans include unlimited users. Events beyond plan run at €249 each. Annual billing Free: $1.00 starting credit once. Credit plans from $10 top-up with no expiration. Your own key: 5% infrastructure fee after the first $5.00 of usage.
Key features
  • Draft RFx documents with evaluation criteria and submission guidelines
  • Vendor research and shortlisting
  • Pricing and compliance matrix comparison
  • Negotiation preparation and leverage analysis
  • Works inside Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace
  • Structured workflow process
  • Company template support
  • Event rollover and flexible billing
  • Human review and control at every step
  • Panel of up to six AI models from different vendors
  • Referee rules on re-checkable evidence only
  • Searches academic databases: arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, Europe PMC
  • Executes Python code to verify claims
  • Customizable acceptance standards
  • Matches pause and resume without losing work
  • Shared ledger prevents re-derivation
  • Spending limit per match
What makes it different
  • Operates inside existing tools without requiring adoption of new software or workflows
  • Structured, multi-phase workflow prevents steps from falling through the cracks
  • Category-specific AI knowledge designed for procurement rigor
  • Human-in-the-loop design with transparent, auditable recommendations
  • Pricing by sourcing volume, not seats, with unlimited users
  • Referee decides on evidence, not argument quality
  • Panel from different vendors fails in different directions
  • Stuck is a targeted question, not model thrashing
  • Cost grows with ledger, not round count
  • Published matches become research record
Community votes00
DR (Domain Rating by Ahrefs)17 no change since last check2 no change since last check
Trust Flow (Majestic)80
Citation Flow (Majestic)1813
Referring domains (Majestic)1731

5 details filled in for both companies.

More alternatives to Caddygo More alternatives to Referee.chat

Get help