Threada vs. Ada CX (Cohere-Powered)
Ada CX with Cohere focuses on intent-driven support automation. Threada is crawl-first RAG with citations, freshness controls, and hardened embeds. Here is how they differ and how to pair them.
Comparison
| Dimension | Threada | Ada CX (Cohere) |
|---|---|---|
| Grounding | Hybrid RAG with refusal policy and citations | Intents and flows powered by Cohere |
| Freshness | Sitemap-first crawl, IndexNow, incremental recrawl | Requires updating intents and knowledge sources |
| Analytics | Per-embed impressions, opens, chats, messages, fallback reasons | Conversation and intent metrics |
| Security | SRI, strict widget CSP, origin checks, SSO, formal threat model | Platform security; embed headers depend on setup |
| Multi-tenant | Agency friendly styling and quotas per tenant | Single brand focus |
When Threada fits best
- Content-heavy sites need cited answers without deep intent modeling.
- Agencies manage multiple brands and require isolated styling, quotas, and analytics.
- Security teams insist on strict CSP and origin validation for embeds.
- Ops wants retrieval transparency and adaptive thresholds to curb hallucinations.
When to lean on Ada CX
- Transactional support flows across channels are core.
- You already invested in Ada content, intents, and routing.
- Scenarios need backend actions beyond simple Q&A.
Pairing both
- Deploy Threada on public pages for grounded Q&A with citations.
- Keep Ada CX for transactional and authenticated flows.
- Route account or transactional intents from Threada to Ada CX when flows are required.
- Monitor Threada fallback reasons to decide which intents to model in Ada.
Grounded answers and intent automation are complementary. Using both keeps visitors informed while complex tasks run in purpose-built flows.