Otter vs Notta: Which AI Meeting Tool Fits Your Work?
Otter.ai and Notta are both AI transcription tools designed to capture, transcribe, and summarize meetings and voice recordings. They work similarly: join a meeting, transcribe in real time, produce a summary. The differences are in pricing, minute limits, integration depth, and the nuances of AI output quality. Otter is better known and has deeper calendar and video conferencing integrations; Notta is more generous on the free tier and competitive on price at higher volumes.
Pricing and features verified against otter.ai/pricing and notta.ai/en/pricing (June 2026). Check official sites for current plans and minute limits.
Quick Comparison
| Otter.ai | Notta | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan minutes | ~600 min/mo; 40 min/meeting | 120 min/mo; 3 min/file limit on free |
| Paid plans | Pro ~$8.33–16.99/mo; Business $20/user/mo | Pro ~$9–13.99/mo; Business ~$16.67/user/mo |
| Real-time transcription | Yes | Yes |
| Meeting bot (auto-joins) | Yes (Otter Assistant; Zoom, Teams, Meet) | Yes (Notta Bot; Zoom, Teams, Meet, Webex) |
| AI summary | Yes; action items extraction | Yes; chapter summaries; Q&A summary |
| Language support | English primary; limited multilingual | 50+ languages |
| Playback + search | Full transcript search; audio sync | Full transcript search; audio sync |
| Export formats | TXT, PDF, SRT, DOCX | TXT, PDF, SRT, DOCX, XLSX |
Otter.ai
What it is
Otter.ai launched in 2016 and is one of the most recognized names in AI transcription. It offers real-time transcription for live meetings, an automated meeting bot (Otter Assistant) that joins Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Google Meet to record and transcribe without human intervention, and AI-generated summaries with action item extraction. The free plan includes approximately 600 minutes per month with a 40-minute per-meeting limit. Pro costs approximately $8.33/mo on annual billing or $16.99/mo monthly. Business is $20/user/month.
Strengths
Otter’s calendar integration is reliable — connect Google Calendar or Outlook and Otter Assistant automatically joins scheduled video calls, transcribes the meeting, and emails the summary to participants. The action item extraction is one of its most practical features: AI identifies follow-up tasks and owner names from the conversation. Speaker identification works well when participants are pre-registered. The free plan’s minute allowance is generous compared to most competitors.
Limitations
Otter is primarily English-focused. Multilingual support exists but is not the platform’s strength — for teams that hold meetings in multiple languages, Notta’s 50+ language support is a significant advantage. Transcription accuracy drops in noisy environments or with heavy accents. The 40-minute per-meeting cap on the free plan is a real limitation for longer calls.
Notta
What it is
Notta is an AI transcription and meeting notes platform with broader multilingual support than Otter. It offers a bot (Notta Bot) that auto-joins Zoom, Teams, Meet, and Webex. AI summaries include chapter-based organization and a Q&A-formatted output that makes meeting notes navigable. The free plan includes 120 minutes per month with a 3-minute file upload limit. Pro costs approximately $9/mo on annual billing or $13.99/mo monthly. Business is approximately $16.67/user/month.
Strengths
Notta’s multilingual support — 50+ languages — is the clearest differentiator. International teams that hold meetings in Japanese, Spanish, Chinese, French, or other languages get native transcription rather than translation-after-the-fact. The Q&A-formatted summary makes it easier to find specific answers from a meeting without reading the full transcript. At comparable paid tiers, Notta is slightly less expensive than Otter.
Limitations
Notta’s free plan is less generous than Otter’s: 120 minutes per month versus 600, and a 3-minute file upload cap that makes testing with real meeting recordings difficult. Otter is more established and has a larger user base, which shows in integration ecosystem maturity and enterprise trust. The meeting bot on both platforms serves the same purpose, but Otter’s calendar sync is more seamlessly integrated into the overall workflow.
How They Compare
Multilingual support
Notta wins clearly. 50+ languages with native transcription support is a meaningful differentiator for international teams. Otter’s English transcription quality is strong, but for non-English workflows it is not the right tool.
Free tier
Otter wins on free tier generosity: 600 minutes per month with a 40-minute per-meeting cap is meaningfully more useful than Notta’s 120 minutes and 3-minute file limit.
AI summaries
Both produce AI summaries. Notta’s Q&A-formatted chapters make long-meeting summaries more navigable. Otter’s action item extraction is more directly practical for teams tracking follow-ups.
Who Should Choose Otter.ai
English-speaking teams that hold most meetings in Zoom, Teams, or Google Meet and want reliable auto-join with calendar sync. Users who want a generous free tier to evaluate the tool before committing. Teams where action item tracking from meetings is a priority workflow.
Who Should Choose Notta
International and multilingual teams that hold meetings in multiple languages. Teams at Zoom, Teams, Meet, or Webex environments (Notta adds Webex support Otter does not). Users on a tighter budget who need paid-tier features at slightly lower cost.
How to Decide
For English-only teams, both work well — start with Otter’s free tier given its higher minute allowance, and upgrade if you need more. For teams with multilingual meetings, Notta is the right choice by a significant margin. For enterprise Webex environments, Notta is the only option of the two.
For related meeting tools, see our comparison of Fathom vs Grain for AI meeting note-takers, our picks for the best AI meeting assistants, and our guide to how to reduce tool overload at work when juggling meeting tools.