A major problem of storing Dynamics 365 documents in SharePoint is the missing synchronization of privileges and permissions. This allows unauthorized SharePoint users to access private documents and sensitive data even if they don’t have CRM privileges to do so. CB Replicator, is an out-of-the-box solution that is designed to remedy this issue by automatically synchronizing Dynamics CRM privileges with SharePoint permissions.
$3,600
per 100 users
Coda by Grammarly
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Coda, acquired by Grammarly in early 2025, is a template-based document creation and collaboration solution, supporting a variety of use cases.
$0
per month
Pricing
CB Permissions Replicator
Coda by Grammarly
Editions & Modules
CB Dynamics CRM to SharePoint Permission Replicator for 100 User
$3,600
per 100 users
Free
$0.00
per month
Pro
$10.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Team
$30.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Enterprise
Custom Pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CB Replicator
Coda by Grammarly
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
$80 per user
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
With Coda, you only pay for Doc Makers.
Often one person creates a doc, others edit it, and some simply observe from afar. Instead of charging for everyone, we only charge for the people who create docs.
Interested in enterprise pricing? Visit coda.io/enterprise
Basically, my main experience is focused on Dynamics, I have worked with similar tools developed in a particular way by the firms for which I have worked. They are monitoring tools developed by the system and planning area. For the internal use of the company. Obviously, this …
Coda is a more complete package that is very robust and will meet the needs of almost any organization who wants to track project and meet desired timelines. By implementing project trackers the team can easily collaborate together and get the work done. Coda is much easier to …
We previously used airtable, and I'm not sure why we switched, but it seems like Coda has more flexibility and is a little more user friendly for generic users and not power users.
Coda is not as great as ClickUp or Notion in many ways, but it surely has a better user interface and pricing in my view and allows good collaboration. However, integrations work much better with other competitors as compared with Coda, and would prefer others if pricing was …
Trello seems to be more focused on IT oriented projects where as Coda has wide scale applications across all departments. Coda was selected because of the perception it was more dynamic and I believe it has proven to be more dynamic. Coda is a very easy to use and understand …
I don't know why leadership choose Coda over Google, but I do see the value in the organization as well as diversity of what you can do with pages designs and integrations
We used Airtable for a while and looked at Notion briefly. Airtable is good, yet a bit technical and doesn't come with rich text and formatting capabilities--so less suitable for publishing/sharing with the rest of the organization. We haven't used Notion for real; I did look …
Coda is very aesthetically appealing and fun to create docs. The benefit of Coda is that it makes a lot automated, but what is sacrificed is the flexibility that other tools can offer.
For general use cases, Google Docs or Airtable are often a better starting place. But if things get complex or you're constantly pairing the two together, consider graduating to Coda to save yourself long-term headaches.
Notion is great for personal use, but the powerful …
The tables within Coda are similar to lists in SharePoint or Google Tables, but the document portion of Coda is what sets it apart. Having the ability to summarize that table data in a document is unique to Coda.
Coda is the only tool with the ability to fully customize your views and the behavior within a given data table. They've put a LOT of thought into this and are miles above and beyond Smartsheet, Airtable, and Notion (I've evaluated all three extensively).
We were looking for many different things to improve our internal processes before we came across Coda. A large part of my work involves marketing, project management, service management and data analytics. For a company like ours, we find Coda the most cost-effective and …
I first tried Notion and, although it can be easier to work with for some simple tasks, when it comes to tables and linked data, Coda is more versatile and comprehensive.
For the use we needed in the company, Coda was a way easier and simpler solution. Jira and the Atlassian suite is more complete and structured, but it is was way too complicated.
Coda's automation and flexibility makes it much easier and more interactive than other tools like Airtable. With Airtable, we couldn't get as much traction or flexibility, so we stopped using it after a few months. Jira, on the other hand, has proven to be more helpful for task …
I primarily use Mavenlink for scheduling purposes but with Coda, I'm able to do that, plus have an open way to communicate with the rest of my team when we want to add certain artists to a specific job. Instead of using another software for communicating across all of our …
They are similar but I like that Coda has more templates that are suited for marketing (GTM timelines, pulse updates, etc). One pain point for us is getting the engineering team on Coda but they seem to prefer Jira and Aha!
While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use …
The price point is most attractive, they have a dedicated team of support agents/doc makers that provide valuable templates, and it really was the best option to fit our current needs as a startup team who will be scaling and the product can scale with us in the long run.
It is an ideal program for the portfolio of already consolidated clients, for large financial companies with a high professional profile. In the cases that I do not recommend it, it is for small and medium-sized financial companies, with a portfolio of clients in training, since the cost-benefit ratio is not attractive.
Coda is great to build a place for your users to go to and see information. It is easy to navigate through and the variety of content creation is great. However, it is not always easy to create what you want and there is a lot of playing around and learning. Coda also sometimes misses some functionality which is expected. For example, downloading a list of users that have access to the platform. Being able to send push notifications when a new page has been created etc. Overall it is a good tool to use just be prepared to invest time!
One source of truth: It's incredibly easy to keep everything organized and easy to find.
Being able to show different views of the same information throughout your doc makes it really easy to customize the information.
In general, I love the "coding" aspect of it, and being able to do advanced functions has helped us create some really interesting automation and streamline our process.
The graphics could be developed in a better way, they should be more modern, friendly and show the information in more detail.
Develop a module in the application that allows personalization by the user, giving him the possibility to manage a tool made by him to suit him. Moves the APPS Mobile concept to the design of the program.
Although the tool is well integrated with Microsoft, you can think of a development of integration with social networks or mobile developments, both users, and customers.
Develop a more economical and simple version, aimed at small and medium enterprises, with small client portfolios
It is a complementary tool of the main CRM, which provides an adequate management of the documentation, reports, files that are derived from the business activity. It offers adequate levels of security for small businesses, the implementation is easy compared to other tools, it is easy to use, it offers adequate file capacity. In the future it can be strengthened with access to the cloud, development of apps and integration with other platforms.
Coda is definitely something that has been proven to drive positive impact in our organization. We have many divisions that can benefit from this that we have yet to explore. It would definitely be worth renewing.
As it has already been said before, it is a simple implementation program, easy to use, with a short learning curve, with a friendly interface, a good design, a security according to the type of company and with the possibility of personalization. It provides an accessible cost tool to improve business management and document management.
There is a little bit of a learning curve on where to point and click to add in different elements and make edits. But it is still very manageable once you get the hang of it. I do still have some issues with some of my connected pages updating each other when I don't want them to sync. So I'll end up editing one page, and it will make the same edits on another page.
We haven't done any integrations - the initial part of our experience we found that for docs with complex formulas, the page tends to load slowly but in recent months, Coda has improved and optimized the loading times in general and we generally don't find any problems in terms of speed anymore.
Until now, technical support has not been required to a large extent, but for this question three variables must be taken into account; The level of complexity of the implementation of the tool, the courses, tutorials, training and learning curve of the users, and finally the technical support as such. This tool has implementation attributes and ease of use, reducing the incidence of technical support.
Mainly due to timezone differences. I think Coda's support in general is well implemented and executed. They know their stuff and are helpful. But since I'm not in the same timezone, solution rates are slower for me, and that's not something I prefer. I work in customer service, too, and more often than not, time is important. Shortening the solution time would be a much greater experience.
Check the seller's website, read the technical specifications of the product, calculate the investment in personnel, software and hardware, validate that the management modules document is what they are looking for. Project the integration of the program with the systems that the company manages. Read many reviews and note the most important points of the user experiences.
I'm relatively inexperienced but this experience is meaningful. It would have been nice to have some guidance from Coda so that we understood more on Coda's purpose and potential.
Basically, my main experience is focused on Dynamics, I have worked with similar tools developed in a particular way by the firms for which I have worked. They are monitoring tools developed by the system and planning area. For the internal use of the company. Obviously, this is a leading international program.
For general use cases, Google Docs or Airtable are often a better starting place. But if things get complex or you're constantly pairing the two together, consider graduating to Coda to save yourself long-term headaches. Notion is great for personal use, but the powerful automation and collaboration features in Coda make it a better fit for teams in my experience so far.
I think scalability is definitely good here since it's based on number of doc makers. Implementation into each dept becomes simpler. That being said, due to the nature of our work, we find it easier that we have a "super user" and then a team of other doc makers. This would make the doc creation and management more efficient.
Without speaking directly of figures, on the positive side of the implementation of the program is tied to the time of learning the tool. In practice, it is much easier to learn by professionals, making the implementation time short, as well as, minimizes the margin of error in the initial handling of the program.
As it is a tool for easy learning and with a reduction in the margin of error due to the learning curve, it allows working only with the technical support offered by the provider, without having the need to create an internal department of attention to the user, which lowers costs.