Collective[i] vs Mattermark
Collective[i] vs Mattermark, compared side by side on 19 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Collective[i] is on 49/100 and Mattermark on 60/100.
![Collective[i] logo](https://cdn.startuphub.ai/storage/v1/object/public/entity-images/startups/990245.jpg){kind=small}
Where each one leads
Collective[i]
- headcount: 47 against 5
- funding raised: $20.0M against $15.8M
- LinkedIn following: 9,700 against 4,832
Mattermark
- our overall score: 60/100 against 49/100
- domain rating: 68/100 against 43/100
At a glance
| Measure | Collective[i] | Mattermark |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | AI-powered platform that helps B2B sales teams improve forecasting and performance. | Sales intelligence and deal sourcing platform for investors, sales, and marketing professionals. |
| Category | Sales Intelligence, Sales Enablement, B2B SaaS, Revenue Operations | Sales Intelligence, Lead Generation, Business Intelligence, Data Platform |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Platform |
| Founded | 2014 | 2013 |
| Headquarters | Boston, United States | San Francisco, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Collective[i] | Mattermark |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 47 | 5 |
| Total funding | $20.0M | $15.8M |
| Latest round | Series B | Series B |
| Valuation | Not published | $42.0M |
| LinkedIn followers | 9,700 | 4,832 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Collective[i] | Mattermark |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 49/100 | 60/100 |
| Traction | 53/100 | 44/100 |
| Team | Not published | 70/100 |
| Community | Not published | 8/100 |
| Search visibility | 26/100 | 53/100 |
| Quality | 62/100 | 68/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (46/100) | D (44/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 43/100 | 68/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Collective[i] | Mattermark |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Not detected | Self Managed |
| CMS | Framer | WordPress |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Jquery, Bootstrap |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager, Hotjar | Google Analytics 4, Segment, Hotjar |
| Support stack | Not detected | HubSpot |
Collective[i] vs Mattermark: common questions
Which is better, Collective[i] or Mattermark?
On our 0-100 score Mattermark rates higher (60/100 against 49/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 19 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Collective[i] and Mattermark compare on the numbers?
Collective[i] leads on headcount (47 against 5), funding raised ($20.0M against $15.8M), LinkedIn following (9,700 against 4,832). Mattermark leads on our overall score (60/100 against 49/100), domain rating (68/100 against 43/100).
Read the full Collective[i] review and pricing or the Mattermark review and pricing. You can also browse other Collective[i] alternatives we track.