8 Best Alternatives to Remote for EOR in 2026

Companies evaluating alternatives to Remote aren't questioning the platform's employee experience quality. They're questioning whether premium pricing and support model limitations align with their operational reality.

The calculus changes when your finance team needs transparent cost forecasting rather than consumer-grade UX, when support responsiveness matters more during compliance issues than onboarding polish, or when regional statutory depth in markets like India becomes non-negotiable.

This guide examines eight Remote alternatives through the lens of what matters when operational efficiency and cost accountability drive decisions:

• Pricing transparency and predictability
• Support accessibility across all tiers
• Regional compliance depth beyond baseline statutory requirements
• Scalability without premium pricing locks

We've structured each evaluation around the questions HR and finance leaders ask when employee experience excellence must balance with operational pragmatism, not the questions providers want you to prioritize.

The Top Remote Competitors: A Quick Overview

Employee experience matters, but pricing transparency and support accessibility determine long-term viability. Compliance depth reveals itself in regional statutory expertise, not just owned entity counts.

This table highlights decisive operational differences, not feature parity claims.

See how entity-backed EOR with statutory depth compares to employee experience-first models → Explore Gloroots

Best 8 Alternatives to Remote You Should Try

These platforms represent the realistic shortlist for companies moving past Remote. We've led with Gloroots not as house bias, but because its compliance-first EOR model and cost transparency address the gaps most commonly cited in Remote migration conversations:

• Premium pricing at scale
• Support responsiveness declines beyond enterprise tiers
• Regional statutory depth in complex markets like India
• Finance-grade reporting and cost predictability

Here are the top 8 alternatives to Remote:

1. Gloroots

‍

Gloroots is an Employer of Record and global hiring platform built for companies that treat international expansion as a compliance and execution challenge, not just a vendor selection exercise.

While many EOR providers compete on country coverage and surface-level features, Gloroots focuses on operational depth in complex employment markets, where payroll, tax, and labor law mistakes create real business risk. Its model combines a technology platform with in-house legal and HR expertise, rather than relying solely on third-party partner networks.

Gloroots also supports companies from the hiring stage through ongoing employment. Recruitment services are available in select markets, and the platform is designed to connect hiring, onboarding, and EOR into one workflow, reducing handoffs and delays.

By pairing self-serve tools with dedicated human support and transparent, country-specific pricing, Gloroots gives startups and mid-market teams a more predictable way to build and manage global teams.

Key Features

• Employer of Record services across 140+ countries with direct entity ownership in high-priority markets
• India GCC enablement: Accelerated setup for Global Capability Centers, including payroll, PF/ESIC/gratuity, statutory filings, and local HR advisory
• Bridges the temporary stopgap needs while entities form or support long-term operations
• Contractor management with compliant conversion pathways to full-time employment as teams scale
• Country-specific legal playbooks reducing misclassification and regulatory exposure through jurisdiction-level compliance frameworks
• Consolidated global payroll with transparent FX handling, automated tax deductions, and local currency payouts
• Finance-grade reporting: Line-item invoices with country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping, and audit-ready exports for CFO visibility
• Recruiting and talent advisory (India-focused): Local sourcing support, compensation benchmarking, and onboarding playbooks to retain GCC talent
• Hybrid service model: Self-service dashboard for contracts paired with assigned Customer Success Managers for compliance guidance

Pros

• Transparent pricing with no surprise fees or mid-contract cost escalations
• India's statutory depth is unmatched by global-first platforms, critical for GCC operations, where PF compliance and gratuity calculations require local expertise
• Faster activation timelines: Hire-to-onboard in days rather than weeks, with entity setup bypassed entirely
• Direct legal employer accountability, where Gloroots assumes statutory compliance risk rather than externalizing it to third-party partners
• Finance integration quality: Detailed invoicing and GL exports reduce month-end reconciliation burden for distributed finance teams
• Dedicated CSM support is included at all pricing tiers, not reserved for enterprise contracts

Cons

• Employee experience UX is less polished than Remote's consumer-grade interface
• Coverage footprint smaller than Remote or RemoFirst, though 140+ countries cover 95%+ of global hiring demand
• Less brand recognition in the North American market relative to Remote or Deel
• Benefits packages focus on compliance and competitiveness rather than premium market positioning

Pricing

Gloroots starts at $299 per employee per month for full EOR services. This positions significantly below Remote's $599/month baseline while maintaining owned-entity compliance and dedicated support.

According to Gloroots' pricing analysis, pricing remains consistent across geographies with transparent add-on costs for benefits upgrades or compliance advisory.

What People Say About Gloroots

What our clients are saying

"Gloroots has been exceptional so far, allowing us to make seamless transactions with our contractors with minimal effort on their end."

Prabhav Varambally

VP, Customer Enablement at AssetMantle

Read Case Study

Best For

• Companies establishing or scaling GCCs in India where statutory expertise and local HR advisory differentiate operational success from compliance exposure.
• Startups and mid-market teams (10-250 employees) prioritizing cost predictability and dedicated support over employee experience polish.
• Organizations are converting contractors to employees across multiple markets, where Gloroots handles classification risk and benefits transitions smoothly.
• Finance-conscious teams requiring audit-ready reporting and transparent month-end reconciliation without premium pricing.

2. Deel

‍

Deel built its market position on contractor payment infrastructure before expanding into full EOR services. This heritage shows in the platform's strength in managing mixed workforce models (contractors, employees, direct hires) from a unified dashboard.

The company owns entities in key markets but relies on partner networks for long-tail country coverage, creating variable service quality across geographies.

Key Features

• EOR coverage in 150+ countries with entity ownership in 80+ markets
• Contractor management with automated compliance screening and payment workflows
• Integrated HRIS and payroll for multi-country workforce consolidation
• Immigration and visa support for employee relocations

Pros

• Viable for early-stage international hiring
• Contractor-to-employee conversion workflows run smoother than most competitors due to the platform's dual infrastructure
• Strong API ecosystem for companies requiring payroll/HRIS integrations with existing tech stacks
• Quick onboarding timelines for standard employment scenarios

Cons

• Pricing ($599/employee/month+) is comparable to Remote without employee experience differentiation
• Partner reliance in many countries creates inconsistent employee experience and compliance gaps, particularly in regulated markets
• Support quality degrades at scale, with multiple customer reports citing delayed responses during payroll issues or regulatory questions
• Deel faced regulatory scrutiny in multiple jurisdictions for misclassification and licensing gaps
• Pricing opacity beyond the entry tier, where costs escalate quickly with benefits, equity, or compliance add-ons

Pricing

Deel's EOR pricing starts at $599 per month per employee, though this rate applies primarily to contractor management. Full EOR services with benefits and statutory compliance typically range from $599 to $699/month, depending on country and service level.

What Do Deel Users Say?

User sentiment splits sharply based on workforce composition. Teams managing primarily contractors praise Deel's payment automation and global coverage.

However, companies scaling employee headcount cite support responsiveness issues, payroll accuracy problems, and compliance blind spots in markets where Deel lacks owned entities.

Best For

Startups are hiring primarily contractors with occasional employee conversions. High-volume hiring teams (100+ international workers) requiring API-first integrations.

‍

3. Oyster

‍

Oyster positions itself as a global employment platform designed for distributed teams, emphasizing compliance automation, employee experience, and HR workflow integration.

The company operates through a hybrid model with owned entities in priority markets supplemented by partner networks for extended geographic coverage across 180+ countries.

Oyster differentiates through its focus on mid-market companies scaling internationally, offering standardized compliance frameworks and self-service tools alongside managed support tiers.

Key Features

• EOR services in 180+ countries with owned entities in 40-50 core markets
• Global payroll with automated tax compliance and multi-currency payments
• Benefits administration and equity management
• Contractor management with compliance screening

Pros

• Strong mid-market positioning with features balancing self-service and managed support
• Owned entities in key hiring markets reduce partner-related compliance variability
• Employee onboarding experience rated above enterprise platforms
• Compliance automation reduces manual HR ops work for standard employment scenarios

Cons

• Premium pricing ($699/employee/month) exceeds Remote without clear differentiation
• Partner reliance in many countries creates variable service quality and compliance gaps
• Support responsiveness is inconsistent in high-complexity markets like India, Brazil, and parts of the EU
• Pricing unpredictability at scale, with mid-contract price changes and undisclosed compliance fees reported
• Contractor management is not native, creating friction during worker classification changes
• Scalability limits beyond 200 employees, where enterprise teams require bespoke SLAs and deeper compliance advisory

Pricing

Oyster's EOR services start at $699 per employee per month, positioning at the premium end of mid-market providers. Pricing includes baseline compliance and benefits, though add-ons for enhanced support, equity management, or country-specific upgrades introduce cost variability.

What Do Oyster Users Say?

Mid-market teams praise Oyster's compliance automation and onboarding experience in low-regulation markets.

However, companies scaling past 50 employees or expanding into complex jurisdictions cite support delays, pricing surprises, and limited statutory depth compared to specialized providers.

Best For

Mid-market companies (50-200 employees) with strong internal HR ops capacity.

‍

4. Papaya Global

Papaya Global positions itself as an enterprise-grade global payroll and workforce management platform with EOR capabilities.

The company owns entities in select markets while partnering for broader coverage across 160+ countries. Papaya differentiates through its payroll consolidation engine, designed for multinational corporations managing complex, multi-country payment operations at scale.

The platform emphasizes finance-team workflows, audit compliance, and regulatory reporting over employee experience or startup accessibility.

Key Features

• EOR and payroll services across 160+ countries with a hybrid entity ownership model
• Global payroll engine consolidating multiple countries into unified payment runs
• Automated tax compliance and statutory reporting for finance teams
• Workforce management tools, including time tracking and expense management
• Integration with major ERP systems (SAP, Oracle, NetSuite)

Pros

• Enterprise-grade payroll consolidation reduces finance team workload for companies operating in 10+ countries
• Strong audit and compliance reporting capabilities meeting SOC 2 and GDPR requirements
• ERP integration depth appeals to companies with existing finance tech stacks
• Entity ownership in key corporate markets (US, UK, Germany, Israel)

Cons

• Pricing targets enterprise budgets, eliminating Papaya from consideration for startups and mid-market teams
• Partner reliance in many countries creates variable service quality similar to Remote's partner-dependent regions
• Employee experience quality rated below Remote and Gloroots in G2 reviews
• Implementation timelines longer than competitors, often requiring 4-6 weeks for full deployment
• Limited regional specialization outside Western markets, lacking equivalent to Gloroots' India GCC depth

Pricing

Papaya Global uses custom enterprise pricing starting around $599 per month per employee, with costs varying based on country mix, payroll complexity, and integration requirements. 

What Do Papaya Global Users Say?

Enterprise finance teams praise payroll consolidation and audit-ready reporting.

However, HR ops and smaller companies cite implementation complexity, higher costs, and support responsiveness issues compared to more agile competitors.

Best For

Enterprise organizations (500+ employees) operating in 10+ countries requiring consolidated global payroll and finance-grade reporting.

5. Rippling

Rippling approaches EOR as one component of a unified HR, IT, and finance platform rather than a standalone global employment solution.

The company built its reputation on all-in-one workforce management for US companies, then expanded internationally through partner networks covering 90+ countries.

Rippling's differentiator lies in system consolidation: managing employee devices, software licenses, payroll, benefits, and compliance from a single interface. However, this breadth comes with trade-offs in EOR depth and international compliance expertise.

Key Features

• EOR services in 90+ countries through a partner network model
• Unified platform managing HR, IT, payroll, and device management
• Automated employee onboarding and offboarding workflows syncing across systems
• Benefits administration with US-focused depth

Pros

• Platform consolidation reduces vendor sprawl for companies wanting unified HR and IT management
• Strong US payroll and benefits administration superior to international-first EOR providers
• Automated workflows reduce manual work during employee lifecycle changes
• IT device management is unique among EOR competitors, appealing to tech companies

Cons

• Partner-heavy international model creates compliance gaps and inconsistent service quality outside the US
• EOR functionality feels secondary to the core HR/IT platform, lacking depth of dedicated providers like Gloroots or Remote
• Pricing complexity where base platform costs exclude meaningful EOR services, add-ons escalate quickly
• Limited country-specific expertise in complex markets like India, Brazil, or Germany
• Support quality for international employment issues rated below specialized EOR providers
• Entity ownership is unclear in most international markets, raising compliance accountability questions

Pricing

Rippling advertises base pricing from $499 per employee per month, but this covers only basic HR features. True all-in pricing for global EOR often exceeds $500-600/month per international employee once compliance, benefits, and support tiers are included.

What Do Rippling Users Say?

US-focused companies praise platform consolidation and IT management capabilities.

However, teams expanding internationally cite frustration with international EOR limitations, partner-network compliance gaps, and support quality below dedicated EOR specialists.

Best For

US-based tech companies (50-500 employees) with primarily domestic workforce wanting unified HR and IT management.

6. Multiplier

Multiplier targets tech companies requiring API-first integrations with existing HRIS, payroll, and finance systems.

The platform owns entities in 40+ priority markets and partners for extended coverage, balancing operational control with geographic reach. Multiplier's differentiator lies in developer-friendly infrastructure rather than employee experience depth.

Key Features

• EOR services in 150+ countries with owned entities in tech hubs (US, UK, Germany, India, Singapore)
• Robust API for payroll, employee data, and compliance automation
• Global payroll with real-time FX rates and multi-currency support
• Contractor management with classification screening

Pros

• API quality enables headless EOR workflows for companies building custom HR tech stacks
• Tech hub coverage prioritizes markets where engineering teams concentrate (Bangalore, Berlin, London, Singapore)
• Finance system integrations reduce manual data entry and month-end reconciliation work
• Equity management handles stock options and RSUs across jurisdictions, relevant for startups with global cap tables

Cons

• Custom pricing lacks transparency and requires sales conversations to understand true costs
• Support model assumes technical sophistication with less hand-holding than managed service providers
• Benefits packages are standard rather than competitive, focusing on compliance minimums
• Regional expertise is limited outside tech-forward markets
• Employee experience is less polished than Remote's consumer-grade interface

Pricing

Multiplier uses custom pricing based on employee count, country mix, and integration requirements. Market feedback suggests per-employee costs range $400-$500/month for full EOR services with API access. 

What Do Multiplier Users Say?

Technical teams praise API reliability and integration depth, while HR ops teams note gaps in proactive compliance guidance.

Companies with existing HR tech investments value Multiplier's flexibility. Those seeking managed service simplicity often find the platform under-supportive.

Best For

Tech companies (50-500 employees) with engineering resources to build on EOR APIs.

7. RemoFirst

‍

RemoFirst competes primarily on price, offering EOR services starting at $199/month across 185+ countries. That's the widest coverage among Remote alternatives.

However, geographic breadth comes at a cost. RemoFirst relies heavily on third-party partnerships for entity infrastructure and payroll execution, creating compliance exposure that only surfaces during audits or regulatory changes.

Key Features

• EOR coverage in 185+ countries via partner network
• Global payroll with multi-currency payments
• Contractor and employee management from a unified platform
• Basic benefits administration and compliance documentation

Pros

• Aggressive pricing makes international hiring accessible for bootstrapped startups
• Widest geographic coverage among mid-tier EOR providers
• Fast setup timelines for standard employment scenarios
• Contractor payment infrastructure reduces multi-vendor complexity for mixed workforces

Cons

• Partner-heavy compliance model externalizes risk, where accountability becomes murky when employment disputes or regulatory issues arise
• Minimal local expertise in complex markets like India, Brazil, or Germany, where statutory nuances require in-country advisory
• Support quality is inconsistent, where customer success teams lack the depth to navigate payroll exceptions or misclassification questions
• Benefits packages are basic compared to Remote or Gloroots, often statutory minimums rather than competitive offerings
• Employee experience is significantly below Remote's standards

Pricing

RemoFirst's headline rate of $199 per month per employee applies globally with limited variation by country complexity. This pricing reflects a cost-optimized service model. Customers should expect self-service compliance research and reactive (not proactive) support.

What Do RemoFirst Users Say?

RemoFirst users' feedback centers on value for money and geographic reach, with early-stage companies citing RemoFirst as their entry point into international hiring.

However, teams scaling beyond 20-30 employees commonly migrate to providers with stronger compliance infrastructure and employee experience quality.

Best For

Early-stage startups (fewer than 25 international employees) testing global hiring hypotheses.

8. Velocity Global

‍

Velocity Global operates as a full-service EOR and global workforce solutions provider targeting enterprise clients managing complex international employment across 185+ countries.

The company combines owned entities in priority markets with an extensive partner network, positioning itself as a managed service provider for organizations requiring white-glove support and regulatory expertise.

Velocity Global differentiates through dedicated account management, customized compliance frameworks, and industry-specific solutions rather than self-service technology or standardized pricing.

Key Features

• EOR services across 185+ countries with a hybrid entity ownership model
• Dedicated account teams with white-glove service and compliance advisory
• Industry-specific solutions for healthcare, finance, technology, and manufacturing
• Immigration and visa support for international relocations

Pros

• White-glove service quality with dedicated account management and legal advisory
• Industry specialization for regulated sectors (healthcare, finance) requiring compliance depth
• Owned entities in key markets reduce partner-related compliance gaps
• Proactive compliance monitoring keeps employment practices current with regulatory changes

Cons

• Enterprise-only pricing eliminates Velocity from mid-market and startup consideration
• Custom pricing model requires lengthy sales cycles with no published rate cards
• Implementation timelines are typically 6-8 weeks, longer than agile EOR providers
• The technology platform is less modern than newer competitors like Remote or Gloroots
• Partner reliance in many countries introduces variable service quality
• Premium pricing without clear differentiation from Remote's enterprise tier

Pricing

Velocity Global uses custom enterprise pricing with no published rates. Market feedback suggests costs align with or exceed Remote's $599/month baseline, positioning Velocity for organizations with 200+ global employees and complex compliance requirements.

What Do Velocity Global Users Say?

Enterprise HR and compliance teams praise dedicated account management and industry-specific expertise.

However, organizations cite implementation complexity, higher costs, and limited self-service functionality compared to modern EOR platforms.

Best For

Enterprise organizations (500+ employees) operating in regulated industries require dedicated compliance advisory.

Why Should You Consider Alternatives to Remote?

Evaluating alternatives to Remote rarely stems from dissatisfaction with employee experience quality. It is about operational fit and cost justification.

As teams scale, optimize budgets, or expand into specialized markets, misalignments surface that warrant reassessment.

1. Premium Pricing Without Matching Value

• Remote's $599 per employee/month pricing positions at the premium tier, justified by consumer-grade employee experience and benefits quality.
• However, finance teams question whether employee onboarding polish justifies 2x the cost of alternatives like Gloroots ($299/month) when compliance outcomes and support responsiveness prove comparable.
• Cost-conscious organizations find premium pricing difficult to justify when operational needs prioritize finance predictability over UX excellence.

2. Support Responsiveness Declines Beyond Enterprise Tiers

• Remote's dedicated CSM model reserves premium support for enterprise contracts, creating two-tier service quality.
• Mid-market teams (50-200 employees) report longer response times, ticket-based support, and limited access to compliance specialists compared to platforms like Gloroots offering dedicated CSMs at all pricing tiers.
• Support degradation becomes material when payroll issues or regulatory questions require fast resolution across time zones.

3. Limited Regional Statutory Depth in Complex Markets

• While Remote owns entities in 80+ countries, regional expertise varies significantly by market.
• India expansion reveals limitations where GCC setup, PF/ESIC/gratuity handling, and local statutory advisory require in-country teams that Remote lacks.
• Companies cite generic compliance frameworks that satisfy baseline requirements but miss regional nuances impacting audit readiness and regulatory positioning.

4. Limited Finance Reporting for Growing Teams

• Remote's employee experience focus sacrifices finance-grade reporting depth.
• CFOs and finance teams cite limited country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping functionality, and audit-ready exports compared to platforms emphasizing finance workflows.
• Month-end reconciliation burden increases when invoice transparency and cost attribution require manual workarounds.

5. Scalability Pricing Locks Create Budget Pressure

• Remote's tiered pricing model introduces cost jumps as headcount crosses service thresholds.
• Teams scaling from 50 to 100 employees report unexpected price increases and feature gates that weren't apparent during initial procurement.
• Budget predictability suffers when pricing stability cannot be guaranteed across 18-24 month hiring roadmaps.

6. Benefits Quality Justifies Premium Only in Select Markets

• Remote's competitive benefits packages in EU markets (UK, Germany, France) justify premium pricing.
• However, benefits differentiation diminishes in Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and emerging markets where statutory minimums or market-standard packages prove sufficient.
• Premium pricing for benefits excellence makes sense only when employee retention in high-cost markets drives strategy.

In short, Remote remains a capable EOR, but growing organizations must assess whether premium pricing, support model, and regional expertise align with their operational priorities, not just their employee experience aspirations.

How to Choose the Right Remote Alternative?

Selecting the right alternative to Remote requires moving past employee experience polish and focusing on operational realities that determine day-to-day success.

Use the framework below to validate whether a provider can support your hiring roadmap without introducing hidden costs or support gaps.

Here is the checklist for choosing the right alternative to Remote:

1. Compliance Depth: Entity Ownership vs. Partner Networks

Not all global coverage models carry the same compliance risk. EOR providers typically operate using one of two structures:

Owned-Entity Model

• The EOR owns and operates local legal entities in-country and assumes full employer responsibility.
• Employment contracts, payroll taxes, statutory filings, and regulatory updates are handled directly, with compliance risk fully absorbed by the provider.

Partner-Network Model

• The EOR relies on third-party local partners to employ workers on its behalf.
• While this enables rapid country expansion, it fragments accountability and introduces variability in service quality and compliance execution.
• Compliance gaps often surface during audits or contractor-to-employee transitions, particularly in high-risk jurisdictions.

Best practice: Prioritize owned-entity coverage for your core hiring countries. Use partner-network models only for limited, low-risk, or exploratory hires.

2. Pricing Transparency: All-In Costs, Not Base Rates

Advertised pricing often excludes benefits, compliance services, FX fees, or support tiers.

Premium platforms may appear cost-competitive until service level charges, benefits upgrades, and country-specific add-ons are factored in.

Request sample invoices and validate:

• What drives cost variation between countries?
• Are FX fees transparent or bundled?
• How much do benefits upgrades cost?
• What compliance services are included versus billed separately?
• At what headcount do pricing tiers change?

Transparent pricing models reduce forecasting risk and month-end surprises.

3. Support Model: Tiered vs. Universal Access

Platform features matter less than support quality when issues arise. Differentiation appears during payroll errors, regulatory changes, misclassification reviews, and statutory deadlines.

Evaluate:

• Whether you receive a dedicated Customer Success Manager or tiered support
• Guaranteed response times for payroll issues across service tiers
• Proactive versus reactive regulatory updates
• Access to local employment law experts versus general support teams
• Support availability across time zones

Universal support models offering dedicated CSMs at all pricing tiers outperform platforms reserving premium support for enterprise contracts.

4. Regional Expertise: Generic vs. Market-Specific

Global EOR platforms often deliver baseline compliance that satisfies statutory requirements but fails to account for regional complexity. This approach works in simple markets but increases risk in countries with nuanced labor laws and enforcement practices.

• Generic EORs apply standardized compliance frameworks with minimal local optimization
• Complex markets like India require deeper handling of PF, ESIC, gratuity, bonuses, and statutory leave
• Providers with in-country legal and HR teams deliver more reliable, audit-ready execution

Choosing a market-specific compliance model reduces operational friction and ensures regulatory changes are handled proactively, not reactively.

5. Employee Experience vs. Operational Efficiency

Consumer-grade UX and benefits polish drive employee satisfaction but may not justify premium pricing when operational priorities center on cost predictability and finance workflows.

Assess:

• Whether employee experience excellence justifies a 2x pricing premium
• If the benefits quality in your hiring markets exceeds market standards
• Whether onboarding polish matters more than finance reporting depth
• If support responsiveness for compliance issues outweighs self-service UX

Balance employee experience with operational efficiency based on hiring markets and team priorities.

6. Scalability: Pricing Stability vs. Tier Locks

An EOR that works at 10 employees may introduce pricing jumps or feature gates at 50 or 100. As scale increases, tier transitions, support model changes, and pricing renegotiations compound.

Assess:

• Pricing stability as headcount grows across 18-24 months
• Service tier thresholds that trigger support model changes
• Finance-grade reporting and country-level cost visibility
• API and HRIS integration readiness for future tech stack needs
• Whether the platform is designed for enterprise or startup operational models

In short, the right Remote alternative is the provider whose compliance ownership, cost transparency, support accessibility, and regional expertise align with your operational priorities and 18-24 month growth trajectory, not just your employee experience aspirations.

Take your HR Solutions Global
Onboard 2x faster across 140+ countries with Gloroots.
Talk to our experts

What Are The Common Mistakes To Avoid When Choosing Remote Alternatives?

Below are the most frequent mistakes teams make when evaluating Remote alternatives. Each appears manageable early on, but often leads to expensive EOR migrations later.

1. Prioritizing Employee Experience Over Operational Efficiency

• Remote's consumer-grade UX and benefits polish create excellent employee satisfaction in high-cost markets.
• However, mid-market teams often discover they're paying premium pricing for features that don't impact compliance outcomes or finance workflows.

The reality: Employee experience excellence matters, but a 2x pricing premium makes sense only when retention in competitive markets justifies the investment.

Evaluate: Whether your hiring markets and employee demographics require premium benefits and onboarding polish, or whether compliance depth and cost predictability deliver better operational outcomes.

2. Assuming Owned Entities Equal Regional Expertise

• Remote owns entities in 80+ countries, but entity ownership doesn't guarantee regional statutory depth.
• India expansion reveals gaps where GCC setup, PF/ESIC/gratuity, and local advisory require in-country teams that owned-entity models alone don't provide.

Prioritize: EOR providers with demonstrated market-specific expertise in your priority markets over platforms with impressive owned-entity counts but generic compliance frameworks.

3. Overlooking Support Model Degradation at Scale

• "Dedicated customer success" often means tiered support where CSM access is reserved for enterprise contracts.
• Mid-market teams (50-200 employees) discover support responsiveness declines as they scale, with ticket-based systems replacing direct access to compliance specialists.

Evaluate: Actual support SLAs across all pricing tiers, response time guarantees, and whether you have direct access to payroll specialists and compliance advisors, not just account coordinators.

4. Underestimating Finance Reporting Needs

• Employee experience-first platforms often sacrifice finance-grade reporting depth.
• CFOs discover limitations in country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping, and audit-ready exports only after the month-end reconciliation burden increases.

Request: Sample invoices showing country-level cost breakdowns, FX fees, benefits costs, and compliance charges.

Employer of Record software with transparent pricing and finance reporting reduces the month-end reconciliation burden.

5. Choosing Platforms Without Pricing Stability Guarantees

• Tiered pricing models introduce cost jumps as headcount crosses service thresholds.
• Mid-contract price changes and feature gates create budget surprises when pricing stability wasn't contractually guaranteed.

Request: Explicit pricing guarantees covering 18-24 month hiring roadmaps, including headcount thresholds that trigger tier transitions and cost increases.

6. Ignoring Market-Specific Benefits Differentiation

• Premium benefits packages in EU markets justify premium pricing.
• However, benefits quality in Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and emerging markets often matches market standards available through mid-tier providers at 50% lower costs.

Assess: Whether benefits differentiation in your hiring markets justifies premium pricing, or whether market-standard packages with compliance certainty deliver better value.

7. Optimizing for Coverage Count Over Execution Depth

• 170+ country coverage sounds impressive, but partner-dependent regions introduce compliance gaps and service variability.
• A provider with 80 owned entities and deep regional expertise outperforms one with 180 countries but shallow execution in your priority markets.

Prioritize: Execution depth in core hiring countries over geographic breadth in markets you'll never use.

These mistakes are avoidable with a structured evaluation approach. The right Remote alternative supports scalable growth, compliance confidence, and operational efficiency without requiring premium budgets or sacrificing support accessibility.

Why Choose Gloroots?

Gloroots is built for companies that view global hiring as a long-term employment strategy, not a procurement exercise.

Teams moving from Remote choose Gloroots to eliminate implementation delays, reduce compliance risk in complex markets, and gain cost predictability without sacrificing support quality.

How Gloroots supports global teams:

• Compliance-first infrastructure with owned entities and country-specific legal playbooks that reduce misclassification and regulatory exposure
• Proactive compliance monitoring to keep contracts, payroll, and statutory filings current as labor laws change
• Transparent pricing from $299 per employee per month with no hidden fees, mid-contract escalations, or surprise add-ons
• Line-item invoicing and finance-grade reporting, including country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping, and audit-ready exports
• Deep India specialization and GCC enablement covering PF, ESIC, gratuity, bonus structuring, and localized onboarding for major tech hubs
• Hybrid service model combining self-service workflows with assigned Customer Success Managers and responsive payroll support SLAs
• Support for contractor-to-employee transitions with reduced classification risk and payroll continuity

Gloroots replaces enterprise complexity, opaque pricing, and fragmented compliance with clarity, accountability, and in-country depth, giving growing teams confidence as they scale internationally without requiring dedicated vendor management resources.

Hire Globally Without Premium Pricing

Scale your international workforce with Gloroots' compliance-first EOR model. Get transparent pricing from $299/month, deep in-country expertise, and dedicated support at all tiers without Remote's premium pricing or tiered support limitations.

Book a Demo

FAQs

Why would a company look for alternatives to Remote?

Companies often seek alternatives due to Remote’s high costs, limited benefit flexibility, slower offboarding, and inconsistent support.

What types of platforms are considered good Remote alternatives?

Platforms like Gloroots, Deel, Oyster, and Multiplier are popular alternatives that offer broader global coverage, faster onboarding, and transparent pricing.

How do Remote alternatives help with global hiring?

They manage compliance, payroll, and local regulations, allowing companies to hire international employees quickly and legally without setting up local entities.

What should I consider when comparing Remote.com with its alternatives?

Focus on global reach, compliance support, payroll flexibility, cost transparency, and quality of customer service.

Can I migrate from Remote to Gloroots?

Yes. Gloroots offers seamless migration support, ensuring a smooth transition for all employee records, contracts, and payroll data.