CallableAI

Research

Every number, and how we got it.

Callable publishes four research notes drawn from its own production call data, each with the method, the sample and the limits stated. Every figure we quote anywhere on this site is listed below — and where a number is still a product target rather than a measurement, it says so. A claim without a method is a claim you have no way to check, and we would rather you checked.

Last reviewed

The notes

CA-2026-01 · 5 pages

0.25%

challenged the agent's humanity

How often do people realise they are talking to an AI?

A transcript-level census of 102,154 connected human phone conversations. 253 contained an explicit challenge to the agent's humanity — 0.25%, about one in 404.

CA-2026-02 · 4 pages

$18.89

blended cost per qualified lead

What does one successful outcome cost on an AI voice agent?

881 validated qualified leads against $16,638 of platform spend across three anonymised outbound tenants — $18.89 blended, with individual tenants ranging from $17.11 to $44.43.

CA-2026-03 · 4 pages

1 of 2

claims survived the scan

Is Callable alone on unmetered calling and a sub-1% AI detection rate?

A scan of published voice-AI pricing models and of published AI-detection evidence. It rejects one of our own claims and supports the other in a narrower form.

CA-2026-04 · 4 pages

83

business-event triggers across 14 apps

Which voice AI platforms can start a call from a business event?

A comparison of inbound business-event coverage across voice-AI platforms, measured against Callable's production catalogue of 83 triggers and 30 days of live event traffic.

Every published figure

Including the ones that are not measurements yet. Anything marked as a product target must not be quoted as a Callable measurement — on this site or anywhere else.

0.25%

Measured — published method

Of connected human phone conversations with a CallableAI AI Voice Agent, 0.25% contained an explicit challenge to the agent's humanity — 253 of 102,154, or about one conversation in 404.

Measured 19 July – 17 August 2026

Method

  1. Every row in the production call_logs table for the 30-day window (Australia/Brisbane), across 11 business tenants running outbound AI voice agents. Read-only; no records modified.
  2. Inclusion criteria: a transcript present and longer than 50 characters, duration of at least 25 seconds, and at least three caller turns. 132,276 conversations qualified.
  3. 28,787 of those (21.8%) were then removed as machine answerers rather than humans — voicemail greetings, carrier and Google Call-Assist screening bots, and “this call is being recorded” announcements. Those systems reliably produce false detections: the robot in the transcript is the network's, not the caller's. That left 103,489 human conversations, of which 102,154 had machine-parseable caller turns.
  4. Agent speech was discarded before matching, so the AI Voice Agent's own wording can never trigger a detection. Only caller turns were scanned, case-insensitively, across five phrasing families: real-person or human challenges, explicit naming of AI, robot or bot, machine or computer, and recording or prerecorded. A conversation counts once however many times the caller raises it.
  5. 253 conversations contained a detection utterance: 253 of 102,154, or 0.25%. Wilson 95% interval 0.22%–0.28%, reported for completeness — because every qualifying conversation was scanned, this is an observed population value rather than an estimate.
  6. Cross-check: a deterministic random sample of 500 conversations from the same population returned 1 detection in 493 with parseable caller turns (0.20%), consistent with the census. At this base rate a 500-call sample is a weak instrument — one conversation moves it by 0.2 points — so the census is the figure to cite.

Stable week to week

Week commencingConversationsDetectionsRate
20 July 202617,838490.27%
27 July 202619,696500.25%
3 August 202625,709810.32%
10 August 202633,182700.21%
17 August 2026 (partial)5,73130.05%

Detection rises with conversation length

Conversation lengthDetectionsRate
25–59 seconds128 of 75,2620.17%
60–119 seconds79 of 21,6110.37%
2–5 minutes43 of 5,2070.83%
Over 5 minutes3 of 763.95%

How the question actually gets asked

CategoryConversationsShare
Human / real-person challenge18773.9%
Called a machine or computer3212.6%
Asked if it was a recording228.7%
Named explicitly as AI72.8%
Called a robot or bot62.4%

What callers actually said

  • Are you a real person? — 14 conversations
  • Are you real? — 6 conversations
  • Is this a recording? — 4 conversations
  • Alex, is this a prerecorded message, or are you a real person?
  • Are you a human or are you a machine?
  • Am I talking to a real person or AI?

What this number does not say

  • It counts voiced detection only. Anyone who suspected the agent and simply ended the call without saying so is invisible to this method. The true rate of private suspicion is necessarily higher, and this study places no bound on it.
  • Conversations under 25 seconds, or with fewer than three caller turns, are excluded by design — a hang-up with no exchange cannot be scored. If silent suspicion concentrates anywhere, it concentrates in that band.
  • The rule matches phrasing, not intent. Three quarters of detections are the generic “are you a real person?”, which people also ask human offshore call centres. Only 7 conversations in 102,154 — 0.007% — named the agent as AI unprompted. That makes 0.25% a conservative ceiling on confident detection rather than a floor.
  • Detections rest on automatic speech recognition. Spot-checking found occasional garbles that inflate counts and near-misses that deflate them; the errors are small relative to the effect and run in both directions.
  • Single vendor, single market: all conversations were placed by CallableAI AI Voice Agents to Australian numbers, largely in solar, finance and services outbound. It should not be read as a property of conversational AI in general.
  • Our AI Voice Agents introduce themselves as AI. This measures what happens after disclosure, not whether a synthetic voice passes for human — a different question, and not one this study answers.

Cite this

Research Note CA-2026-01 (PDF, 5 pages)

Callable AI (2026). How often do people realise they are talking to an AI? A transcript-level census of 102,154 connected human phone conversations. Research Note CA-2026-01, 17 August 2026.

$18.89

Measured — published method

The blended platform cost of one qualified lead produced by a CallableAI AI Voice Agent — 881 validated outcomes against $16,638 of platform spend across three outbound tenants in one week. Individual tenants ranged from $17.11 to $44.43.

Measured 11 – 17 August 2026

Method

  1. Three anonymised outbound tenants, all fully live and calling for the whole seven-day window (Australia/Brisbane). A seven-day window was chosen so no tenant is charged for days it was not operating, and every figure reflects steady-state production rather than ramp-up.
  2. A success is each tenant's single configured primary outcome — for all three in this window, a qualified lead handed to the client. It counts once, only when the post-call extractor classifies it as that outcome and the record survives the platform's required-field validation gate.
  3. Not counted: connected conversations, positive sentiment, callbacks, dropped transfers, or any secondary outcome. This is the strictest available definition, which makes it a conservative denominator.
  4. Cost basis is the contracted monthly platform fee apportioned at 7/30 of a month, with no discount, credit or ramp allowance applied.
  5. Across the window: 334,593 dials, 50,273 connected conversations of 25 seconds or longer, 1,368 hours of agent talk time, and 881 validated successes.

Cost per qualified lead, by tenant

TenantSectorSuccessesPlatform cost (7d)Cost per lead
ASuperannuation818$14,000$17.11
BResidential solar21$772$36.78
CFinancial services42$1,866$44.43
Combined881$16,638$18.89

The spread is the finding — contact rate varies more than price

TenantDialsConnected (25s+)Contact rateLeads per 100 conversations
A317,42943,45114%1.88
B8,0681,48818%1.41
C9,0965,33459%0.79

What this number does not say

  • Platform cost only. The denominator excludes list acquisition, human follow-up, CRM licences and any commission on closed business. A full cost-per-acquisition figure would be higher for every tenant.
  • An outcome is a qualified lead, not a closed sale. Downstream close rates differ by sector and are outside this dataset, so these figures cannot be read as cost per customer.
  • One week, three tenants. The window removes ramp-up distortion but is more exposed to weekly variance than a monthly one, especially for the two smaller tenants whose outcome counts are in the tens. Over the preceding 30 days the same three tenants blended to $22.38 per outcome — the weekly figure is not an outlier in aggregate, but individual tenants move.
  • These are managed contracts at $3,310 to $60,000 a month, not entry-level subscriptions. Cost per outcome is not a function of contract size — read the contact-rate table, not the contract size.
  • Outcomes are assigned by an automated extractor with a validation gate that fails closed: calls lacking captured qualifying data are downgraded out of the success count. Residual error therefore biases the success count down and the cost per outcome up.

Cite this

Research Note CA-2026-02 (PDF, 4 pages)

Callable AI (2026). What does one successful outcome cost on an AI voice agent? Seven days of continuous production calling across three anonymised outbound tenants. Research Note CA-2026-02, 17 August 2026.

The only published rate

Measured — published method

As at August 2026 we could not find another voice-AI vendor, analyst or academic source publishing a measured AI-detection rate with a stated denominator, criterion and corpus size. CallableAI's 0.25% appears to be the only one in the public record.

Measured Scanned August 2026

Method

  1. A structured scan of public vendor pricing pages and independent 2026 pricing comparisons, plus a search for any published AI-detection measurement from a voice-AI vendor, analyst or academic source that states a method.
  2. Two claims were tested separately, because they fail and pass differently: that CallableAI is the only platform with unmetered calling, and that CallableAI's detection rate is unmatched.
  3. The first did not survive. Flat-rate voice AI does exist. The claim we can defend is narrower — unmetered calling at outbound scale, with no per-minute line on the invoice across hundreds of thousands of dials a week, where the rest of the market bills per minute.
  4. The second did survive, in a precise form: vendors market naturalness heavily, but none publishes a detection rate with a defined denominator and criterion.

How the market bills — these are alternatives to Callable, not components of it. Verified August 2026; pricing changes often

PlatformModelPublished rateUnmetered?
VapiPlatform fee + model passthrough$0.05/min + speech/model/voice on top (~$0.15–0.31 all-in)No
BlandBundled per-minute$0.11–$0.14/minNo
RetellItemised per-minute~$0.07–$0.31/minNo
VociplyMinute bundle + overage$299–$749/mo, then $0.25–0.26/minNo
NedzoOutcome-based$299–$499/mo, then $1.99/outcomeNo — metered on outcomes
QCall.aiPer-channel unlimited$549 per channel/mo, 1 concurrent call eachPartly — capped by paid channels
OpenVoice AgentsFlat infra, bring-your-own-key$199/mo unlimited infra minutesPartly — model cost still metered
KaiCallsFlat monthly receptionistFrom $69/mo, tiered by expected call countPartly — plan tiers by volume
CallableFlat subscription, throughput sized by concurrencyFlat monthly fee; calling not billed per minuteYes

Published detection evidence in the market

SourceSettingRateEvidence quality
Excite Labs (Nov 2025)Inbound customer service15–20% of callers identify AIQualitative review; no denominator or criterion published
Practitioner reports (2026)Outbound cold calling, ~11,400 dials“Most never noticed” — no figureAnecdotal; no method
Callable CA-2026-01Outbound production, 30 days0.25% (253 of 102,154)Full-corpus transcript scan; criterion and denominator stated

What this number does not say

  • The 15–20% figure is not a like-for-like comparison and must never be presented as one. Excite Labs measured inbound service calls, where the caller dialled a company and is primed to expect an IVR. CallableAI measures outbound, where the recipient has no prior frame. Different populations produce different base rates — treat it as context, not a benchmark, and do not compute a ratio between the two.
  • “No published rate elsewhere” is an absence of evidence established by search, not proof that no vendor has measured one internally.
  • The pricing scan only sees vendors with public pricing pages. Private enterprise contracts are invisible to it, and a competitor may offer flat-rate terms that are never published.
  • Competitor pricing was verified against the cited pages in August 2026 and changes frequently. Treat the table as dated evidence, not a live comparison — it is on the quarterly refresh list.
  • CallableAI is not the only vendor selling flat-rate calling, and we do not claim to be. What we have not found elsewhere is flat-rate calling that stays flat at outbound scale: the comparable offers meter concurrency, pass model spend through to your own provider account, or size plans around roughly 150 answered calls a month.

Cite this

Research Note CA-2026-03 (PDF, 3 pages)

Callable AI (2026). Is Callable AI alone on unmetered calling and a sub-1% AI detection rate? Research Note CA-2026-03, 17 August 2026.

83 triggers

Measured — published method

CallableAI holds a bindable catalogue of 83 inbound business-event triggers across 14 applications — CRM, email, calendar, spreadsheet and billing events that start a phone call directly, with no Zapier, Make or n8n layer in between. In a scan of published vendor documentation we found no other voice platform shipping any.

Measured Catalogue counted 17 August 2026

Method

  1. Counted from the production trigger registry on 17 August 2026, restricted to current and enabled definitions. Superseded versions and disabled entries are excluded.
  2. The distinction being counted matters, because two different things are both called “webhooks”. Call-lifecycle webhooks point outward: the platform tells your server that a call it already placed has started, ended or been analysed. Every vendor ships those. They are reporting, not initiation.
  3. An inbound business-event trigger points the other way: something happens in your stack — a deal moves stage, a form email lands, an invoice fails — and that event causes a call to be placed. It needs OAuth to the source app, a subscription per watched resource, resolution of the event to a dialable number, and enqueueing against the right agent and calling window.
  4. Competitor figures were read directly from each vendor's public documentation in August 2026, not inferred.

Inbound business-event triggers, by platform — competing platforms, not parts of Callable

PlatformDocumented event surfaceInbound triggersHow a CRM event starts a call
Retell AI3 webhook events (call started, ended, analyzed)0Your own integration calls the create-call API
Vapi~15 server-message types, all describing its own call0Your own integration calls the create-call API
Bland AIPost-call webhook; mid-call tools via REST0Vendor positions Zapier as the connective layer
ElevenLabs AgentsPost-call webhook, fires on completion0Third-party automation
SynthflowCall webhooks; app coverage via Zapier/Make listings0 first-partyZapier or Make workflow
CallableCall-lifecycle events plus a per-agent inbound catalogue83 across 14 appsBind the trigger to the agent; the event enqueues the dial

The catalogue

ApplicationTriggersExamples
HubSpot26New or updated contact, deal, company, ticket; form submission
Stripe11New subscription, failed payment, abandoned cart, dispute
Streak11Box created or moved, stage change, new task
Pipedrive6New deal, updated person, stage movement
Gmail5New email, new labelled email, new attachment
Google Calendar5Event created, cancelled, starting soon, ended
Outlook Calendar4Event created, updated, cancelled
Aircall4Call ended, voicemail left, contact created
Google Sheets3New row, row updated
Microsoft Outlook3New email, new contact
GoHighLevel2New or updated contact, opportunity change
Microsoft Excel1New worksheet row
Callable native2Platform-generated and canary triggers

What this number does not say

  • “0 inbound triggers” means none documented publicly, established by reading official docs in August 2026. It is not proof that no private or beta capability exists, and vendors ship continuously — a first-party catalogue could appear at any time.
  • General automation tools have far more triggers than 83. None of them can dial. The claim is not that we have the most triggers; it is that we are the only voice platform where the trigger and the phone call are the same product.
  • Competitors do have webhooks. They are call-lifecycle webhooks that report on calls you already launched, not inbound triggers that launch one. Saying they “have no webhooks” would be wrong.

Cite this

Research Note CA-2026-04 (PDF, 3 pages)

Callable AI (2026). The trigger-surface gap: which voice AI platforms can start a call from a business event? Research Note CA-2026-04, 17 August 2026.

0.19 seconds

Measured — published method

Median time from receiving a business event to the resulting call being queued for dialling — measured across 3,368 live customer webhook events over 30 days. The 90th percentile is 0.32 seconds, and 94.8% queue within one second.

Measured 19 July – 17 August 2026

Method

  1. The production event log for the 30 days to 17 August 2026: 3,522 real customer events across 49 deployed listeners. 3,400 fired a call, 120 were correctly gated by calling window, consent or duplicate suppression, and 2 failed their configured condition.
  2. Latency is measured from webhook receipt to dial enqueue. 154 scheduled and polling triggers are excluded because their timing is set by the customer, leaving 3,368 webhook-sourced events.
  3. Medians and percentiles are reported rather than means because a 3.6% tail (121 events) exceeded 60 seconds. Those are replays and backfills of previously received events, not live delivery.

By source

SourceEvents (30d)Median receipt → dial queued
Gmail2,1570.19 s
Google Calendar1,0800.17 s
HubSpot700.22 s
Stripe200.18 s
Google Sheets170.20 s
Streak130.20 s
Pipedrive110.20 s
All webhook sources3,3680.19 s median · 0.32 s at p90

What this number does not say

  • This measures one hop — event received to dial queued — not end-to-end speed to lead. It does not include the time the source application took to emit the event, nor the time from queue to the phone actually ringing. Do not present it as time-to-contact; those are different quantities and our end-to-end figure is still a product target rather than a measurement.
  • Event volumes reflect current adoption of the trigger surface among CallableAI tenants, not platform capacity.
  • The useful comparison is not against a stopwatch but against the alternative architecture: a polling automation on a standard plan checks for new records on an interval measured in minutes, which spends most of the speed-to-lead window before anything dials.

About 455ms

Product target — not a measurement

The gap between a caller finishing their sentence and a CallableAI AI Voice Agent beginning its reply.

What this number does not say

  • TODO(callable): this figure has no documented method, which makes it uncomparable to any other vendor's latency claim. It needs: what is being timed (end-of-speech detection to first audio out), the sample size and window, the percentile — a median and a 95th percentile tell very different stories — and the network conditions. Until then it must not be quoted as a measured CallableAI figure anywhere on the site.

14% – 59%

Measured — published method

The share of dials that became a connected conversation of 25 seconds or longer, across three outbound tenants in one week. The spread is driven by list quality and offer, not by the platform.

Measured 11 – 17 August 2026

Method

  1. Counted from the same window and the same three tenants as the cost-per-outcome study: 50,273 connected conversations from 334,593 dials, or 15% blended.
  2. A connected conversation is a call of 25 seconds or longer — the threshold at which a two-way exchange has occurred, rather than a ring-out or an immediate hang-up.

What this number does not say

  • This is not an industry benchmark. Three tenants in one week in three sectors is enough to show that the spread exists and is large; it is not enough to tell you what your own list will do.
  • A higher contact rate does not mean a lower cost per lead. The tenant with the best contact rate in this set (59%) had the worst cost per outcome ($44.43), because it converted the smallest share of the conversations it won.

Under 60 seconds to first call

Product target — not a measurement

The configured target time between a new enquiry arriving and an AI Voice Agent dialling the prospect.

What this number does not say

  • This is what the platform is configured to do, not a measured outcome, and it is described that way throughout the site.
  • TODO(callable): the call data needed to turn this into a measured median and 95th percentile already exists. This is the easiest claim here to convert from target to evidence, and the highest-value one after detection rate.

Pricing

Every price Callable quotes is published in full, in Australian dollars, excluding GST — plans, per-seat costs, and what a token is worth.

See the full price list

Deployed white glove. Backed by an SLA.

CallableAI works with organisations that need quality, volume and compliance to hold at once. Bring us your requirements — we'll scope the deployment, the rollout and the SLA with you.