PitchGhost vs Others
PitchGhost vs Meltwater
Many platforms provide sentiment analysis, brand monitoring, and reporting, but they fail to turn insights into engagement opportunities. That’s the fundamental difference between PitchGhost and Meltwater.
Mar 5, 2025
Action-first social selling or data-heavy observation? Below is a side-by-side look — using current docs and third-party reviews — at how each platform turns (or fails to turn) social chatter into business results.
Core purpose
PitchGhost | Meltwater | |
|---|---|---|
Primary use | Real-time social selling, PR outreach, and lead generation across LinkedIn, X, Reddit, and Facebook | Broad media monitoring and analytics: online news, print, broadcast, and social |
How it works | Every Ghost needs a goal + search queries; the automatic flow pre-fills queries from the goal, then you refine as needed | Users set keyword lists and dashboards, then export or schedule reports for review |
What you get back | Unlimited posts and the functionality to engage with them on PitchGhost itself. | Mentions, sentiment scores, and audience charts — no built-in reply workflow |
Engagement vs. monitoring
PitchGhost
Flags high-intent posts (e.g., “Find posts in which people are complaining about my competitors.") and surfaces them within minutes.
Provides on-brand drafted responses on the Engage tier, so team members can answer faster while retaining full control.
Instant Action extension, HubSpot sync, Discord and webhooks keep the whole team in one loop.
Meltwater
Excellent at counting and labeling mentions, but acting on them is manual: download the list, draft replies elsewhere, and hope you’re still on time.
Offers content scheduling for owned channels, yet no suggested replies to earned conversations.
Tracking depth and flexibility
PitchGhost | Meltwater | |
|---|---|---|
Keyword / topic caps | Unlimited on all plans | Caps by contract size; more keywords = higher price |
Boolean & filters | 15+ advanced filters per Ghost like location, role, etc (specific filters vary by platform). | Keyword operators plus sentiment, but fewer granular persona filters |
Historical data | Monitors for posts created in the last 3 days on the first run. All subsequent scans look for posts since the last run. | Full news archive, 15-month social archive on premium tiers |
Pricing
PitchGhost | Meltwater | |
|---|---|---|
Trial | 7 days free; optional $75 Expert Setup builds your first Ghosts | No free trial — demo request only |
Core plan | Find – $140/mo (1 seat, unlimited Ghosts & keywords) | Pricing bespoke; public estimates start ≈ $7,000 per user per year |
Growth plan | Engage – $200/mo (unlimited drafted responses, Slack/Discord notifications, no seat charge) | Enterprise bundles often exceed $15,000–$20,000 per year and require annual terms |
Why teams pick PitchGhost
Engage while the window is open. Alerts and drafted responses land in the Finds page and/or Slack/Discord seconds after a post appears, so reps reply before competitors.
No keyword tax. Track every competitor, product line, or prospect without watching a meter.
Straightforward budget math. Two fixed plans, cancel anytime, no seat add-ons — and you can pay a one-time setup fee if you’d rather let PitchGhost staff build the first Ghosts.
Where Meltwater still shines
Deep cross-media analytics (news, podcasts, print) and ready-made executive dashboards.
Suitable for corporate comms teams that already have headcount dedicated to translating reports into outreach.
Bottom line
If your KPI is pipeline generated rather than pages reported, PitchGhost’s action-oriented workflow turns mentions into meetings while Meltwater users are still exporting CSVs. For teams that live on dashboards and quarterly share-of-voice charts, Meltwater remains a capable observer — but the engagement gap is hard to ignore.
Written by Fabiola Flores
