Per-seat pricing is one of the oldest conventions in enterprise software. Pay per user, scale costs with headcount, align revenue with adoption. On paper it’s sensible. In practice, for a deal-flow CRM inside a PE firm, it creates a specific and persistent problem.
A CRM is only useful if people use it. The more deal activity is logged, the more relationship context is captured, the more institutional memory accumulates—the more valuable the system becomes. A PE firm’s CRM should include the GP who manages banker relationships, the principal running diligence, the associate sourcing opportunities, the operating partner advising portfolio companies, the CFO monitoring co-investment exposure, and the analyst pulling market data. Everyone who touches deal activity should be in the system.
Per-seat pricing puts pressure in exactly the opposite direction. Every additional user is a line item. Firms rationalize: Do we really need to give the operating partner access? Is the CFO using it enough to justify another seat? The CRM that was supposed to capture the entire firm’s intelligence ends up capturing the intelligence of whoever can be justified on the budget.
The result is a system that is structurally underpopulated. And a structurally underpopulated CRM is a worse CRM—not just for the people who don’t have access, but for everyone who does, because the data they’re working with has gaps.
The AI problem makes this worse
Before AI-native CRM tools, a structurally underpopulated system was an inconvenience. The partner had to call the analyst instead of looking up the market data herself. The GP had to check with the associate instead of querying deal history directly.
Now it’s a more significant problem. The value of AI tools—query your CRM conversationally, surface relationship context before a call, run pipeline intelligence without opening a dashboard—depends entirely on the breadth and quality of the data underneath. An AI assistant reasoning over a well-populated CRM is a different product from an AI assistant reasoning over a system that captures 60% of the firm’s deal activity because only 60% of the team has access.
Per-seat pricing, in a world where AI can genuinely amplify the value of your CRM data, means that the firms willing to pay for more seats get a compounding advantage. And the firms trying to manage costs by limiting access get a compounding disadvantage—not just from the seats themselves, but from the quality of the intelligence those seats would have contributed.
What we do instead
Carta CRM prices by AUM, not headcount. A firm pays based on the size of the business it manages, not the number of people who can log in.
This means unlimited users—every GP, associate, operating partner, CFO, and analyst who might contribute a piece of deal intelligence to the system. It means the AI tools that work best on complete data get to work on data that is actually complete. It means no CFO standing in front of a budget committee explaining why the CRM seat for a senior advisor is worth it.
It also means our incentives are aligned differently. When we build a feature that makes the CRM more useful, we don’t benefit more if firms respond by adding seats. We benefit when firms get real value from the system and stay, and the clearest path to that is building a system that every deal team member genuinely uses.
Per-seat CRM vendors are in a structurally uncomfortable position. They need adoption to demonstrate value, but their pricing model creates incentives to limit adoption. The way out is usually a features arms race—adding enough capabilities that firms feel the cost-per-seat is justified—rather than fixing the underlying misalignment.
→ Watch Ihar walk through the three agentic form factors now emerging across PE and VC firms.
The market is starting to notice
When I talk to deal teams currently on legacy CRM platforms, the conversation usually goes one of two ways. Either they’re paying for seats they’re not using, like licenses for people who don’t log in because the system has never really become part of their workflow. Or they’re managing access carefully, keeping the seat count down, and the system reflects that: good data for the people in it, no data for everyone outside it.
Neither outcome is what a CRM is supposed to produce.
The firms that have moved to AUM-based pricing consistently tell us the same thing: The change in adoption is immediate and noticeable. When there’s no per-seat cost to adding someone to the system, the default changes from “Do we really need to add this person?” to “Why wouldn’t we add this person?”
That default matters, and it’s the difference between a CRM that captures the firm and a CRM that captures part of the firm. In a market where AI tools can turn complete deal intelligence into a genuine operating advantage, capturing the whole firm is becoming a meaningful competitive differentiator.
Carta CRM is priced by AUM—unlimited users, included AI.
Book a demo to see how the model works for your firm.
DISCLOSURE: This communication is on behalf of eShares, Inc. dba Carta, Inc. ("Carta"). This communication is for informational purposes only, and contains general information only. Carta is not, by means of this communication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business or interests. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business or interests, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. This communication is not intended as a recommendation, offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Carta does not assume any liability for reliance on the information provided herein. © 2026 Carta. All rights reserved. Reproduction prohibited.
