Skip to content
Messaging Agents

Claw Messenger vs Linq

One publishes a price of five dollars and the other publishes no price at all, which makes this the widest transparency gap in the comparison.

Side by side

Claw Messenger, Linq compared on price, delivery, policy
Claw MessengerLinq
Price
Advertised from$5/moNot published
The tier most people need$5/moNot published
Setup feeNoneNot published
Per-message feesYes, meteredNone
Delivery
NumberDedicatedNot published
Can message firstIncludedNot published
SMS or RCS fallbackIncludedIncluded
Policy
Compliance claimedNone publishedSOC 2 Type I and Type II, reports for 2022, 2024, 2025 and 2026, 99.95% uptime SLA, 70 controls monitored on a public trust centre, 5 subprocessors named, Annual penetration testing, Published vulnerability disclosure process
When it breaksPublishes a status pageStatus page, 99.95% SLA

Rows where the two agree are dimmed. Checked 2026-09-06.

What actually differs

They differ on price, delivery, and policy.

Claw is $5 a month for 250 messages, rising to $50 for 15,000, on a dedicated number, with iMessage, RCS and SMS through one interface, tapbacks, typing indicators, read receipts, group messages and HMAC-signed webhooks. It states no Mac is required and that it runs on Linux, Docker, Windows or any cloud.

Linq publishes a longer capability list still, adding FaceTime scheduling and live location through Find My, plus a SOC 2 Type II claim and a stated 99.95% uptime SLA described as the only contractual one in the industry. It publishes no price. For most people evaluating this pair, the decision is made before features: one of them can be tried this afternoon for the cost of a coffee, and the other cannot be tried at all without a sales conversation.

Claw Messenger is for

Anything early, small, or being tested.

Linq is for

Anything that needs tapbacks, group threads and a contractual SLA more than it needs a published price.

See every provider compared or answer five questions to narrow it yourself.