Built for teams closing in the browser

Web proposals that live where the deal already does.

Most proposal software ships as a standalone browser tool with its own data model, its own templates, and its own analytics. The result is a workflow that bounces between the CRM and the proposal tool with manual field sync. Strkr ships proposals inside the CRM so the pricing, the terms, the signatures, and the open-rate telemetry all live on the opportunity record directly.

Start free trial See pricing
What this audience is actually dealing with

The pains that bring buyers here.

Web proposal software is a mature category with capable incumbents (PandaDoc, Proposify, Qwilr, Better Proposals, DealHub, Qvidian). The pattern we hear from teams six months into a proposal tool is that the standalone-browser-tool model costs more coordination than it saves. Six pains show up on every call.

Dual data model

Pricing lives in two places.

Standalone proposal tools maintain their own product catalog, pricing matrix, and discount rules alongside whatever the CRM has. Reps paste pricing between the two systems. Finance maintains two sources of truth. Strkr proposals pull pricing from the CRM product catalog directly, so the price-list sync problem disappears.

Context switching

Reps bounce between the CRM and the proposal tool.

Standalone proposal tools require the rep to open a second browser tab, re-authenticate, find the right template, and manually import the account and opportunity data. The context switch costs 5 to 10 minutes per proposal. Strkr proposals draft from inside the opportunity record with the account and contact data auto-populated.

Open-rate telemetry

Prospect engagement lives in a separate dashboard.

Standalone proposal tools track open rate, time on page, and section-level engagement in their own dashboard. The sales manager reviews it in a separate tool rather than seeing it on the opportunity record. Strkr surfaces the proposal engagement telemetry on the opportunity timeline directly, so the deal-review conversation runs on one data view.

Signature flow

E-signature is a third tool.

Many proposal tools require DocuSign, PandaDoc, or HelloSign for the e-signature. The flow spans three systems: the CRM, the proposal tool, and the signature vendor. Strkr integrates with DocuSign and PandaDoc for e-signature where the firm already has a vendor, and the signature status reflects on the opportunity record automatically.

Template management

The template library drifts.

Standalone proposal tools maintain templates separately from the sales enablement tool and the CRM. The approved template on the enablement side is often not the latest on the proposal side. Reps use outdated templates and compliance finds the drift at the next audit. Strkr templates live in the CRM alongside the enablement collateral so one approved library governs everything.

Close conversion

Signed proposal does not auto-close the deal.

In most standalone proposal tools, a signed proposal fires a webhook that an integration catches and (hopefully) updates the CRM. The handshake fails 2 to 5 percent of the time, leaving signed deals in open-stage limbo. Strkr proposals convert to closed-won inline on signature with no handshake and no drift.

What Strkr ships

Nine primitives of a CRM-native proposal tool.

The cards below are the primitives Strkr ships that teams tell us matter for a web proposal workflow that stops costing more coordination than it saves.

Draft from the opportunity

Open the record, click new proposal, done.

Strkr proposals draft from inside the opportunity record. Account, contacts, deal amount, product line items, and billing terms auto-populate from the CRM. The rep edits the content, not the connective tissue.

Pricing from product catalog

One source of truth for every line item.

Strkr proposals pull line-item pricing from the CRM product catalog. Discounting rules, tiered pricing, and multi-year ramps apply automatically. Finance maintains one price list, reps work from it, proposals carry it.

Template library

Approved templates governed in the CRM.

Strkr proposal templates live in the CRM template library alongside the enablement collateral. Approval workflow routes new templates through legal and sales enablement. Reps browse the approved library and start from the right template every time.

Section-level engagement

See what the prospect read.

Strkr proposal engagement telemetry tracks open rate, time on page, time per section, and link clicks. The data surfaces on the opportunity timeline so the rep sees which sections the buyer spent time on before the follow-up call.

E-signature integration

DocuSign and PandaDoc with status sync.

Strkr integrates with DocuSign and PandaDoc for e-signature where the firm already has a vendor. The signature status (sent, viewed, signed, declined) reflects on the opportunity record automatically. For firms without a signature vendor, Strkr ships a lightweight native signature for standard proposals.

Auto-close on signature

Signed proposal moves the opportunity.

Strkr proposals convert the opportunity to closed-won on signature inline. No handshake, no webhook drift, no 2 to 5 percent lost signatures. Finance sees the closed-won in the forecast rollup immediately.

Collaborative drafting

Co-edit with notes and track changes.

Strkr proposals support co-editing with inline notes, suggested edits, and version history. Sales engineering, legal, and the sales rep can collaborate on a draft without the usual Google Docs sidecar workflow.

Approval workflow

Discounting routes through the right approvers.

Strkr proposals route for approval based on discount tier, deal size, or custom rules. A proposal with 20-plus percent discount routes to the VP of sales automatically. A proposal with custom legal terms routes to legal. The audit trail logs every approval step.

Pricing-strip ready

Pricing shows up where the buyer expects it.

Strkr proposals include a dedicated pricing strip (not buried in a terms table) with annual, three-year, and discount view toggles. The buyer sees the pricing clearly and the rep stops answering "what is the total?" over email on the follow-up.

How teams move

Six migration patterns from standalone proposal tools.

The patterns below are live migrations from teams that moved off a standalone proposal tool (PandaDoc, Proposify, Qwilr) to Strkr proposals. The common thread is the standalone-tool coordination tax.

Pricing-sync pain

Finance stopped maintaining two price lists.

A 30-rep team ran PandaDoc for proposals and the CRM for pipeline. The product catalog lived in both tools and drifted monthly. Finance spent roughly 4 hours a month reconciling. On Strkr the proposal pulls from the CRM catalog directly. The reconciliation disappeared and the price-list drift pattern ended.

Open-rate visibility

Deal reviews ran on one data view.

A 25-rep team on Proposify had the proposal engagement data in the Proposify dashboard and the pipeline data in the CRM. Sales managers reviewed deals across two tools. On Strkr the open-rate telemetry surfaces on the opportunity timeline so the deal-review conversation runs on one view. The sales ops lead reclaimed roughly 2 hours a week not stitching the two views together.

Signature drift

Signed proposals stopped sitting in open-stage limbo.

A 40-rep SaaS team ran Qwilr for proposals with a DocuSign bolt-on. Signed proposals occasionally failed to update the CRM opportunity because the webhook handshake dropped. The finance team found 3 to 5 signed-but-open deals per quarter in the forecast. On Strkr the inline conversion eliminated the drift. The finance team stopped running the monthly reconciliation.

Template governance

The outdated-template problem stopped.

A 60-rep enterprise sales team had maintained roughly 40 proposal templates across two tools (enablement collateral and the proposal vendor). The approved template on the enablement side was often not the latest on the proposal side. Compliance flagged the drift at the annual audit. On Strkr the template library is a single governed library in the CRM. The audit cleared without comment the next cycle.

Approval routing

Discount approval routed in minutes instead of days.

A 50-rep team had been emailing discount approvals around because the standalone proposal tool did not route through the sales management hierarchy. A 20-plus percent discount could take 2 to 3 days to clear. On Strkr the approval workflow routes automatically based on discount tier and deal size. The sales ops lead measured the average approval time dropping from 2 days to 4 hours.

Context switching

Reps drafted proposals in 15 minutes, not 45.

A 20-rep team measured the time to draft a proposal on the standalone tool at roughly 45 minutes including context switching, data copy, and template search. On Strkr the draft-from-opportunity flow dropped the time to roughly 15 minutes. The team sized the recovered productivity at roughly 30 proposals a week times 30 minutes saved, or 15 hours a week of rep time redirected to selling.

Honest limits

What Strkr web proposals will not do today.

Any vendor claiming the proposal tool covers every workflow is overselling. The list below is what Strkr does not do today, so the buying decision rests on real expectations.

No complex CPQ

Strkr is proposal, not full CPQ.

Strkr proposals cover pricing from the product catalog with standard discount and ramp rules. For teams needing complex CPQ (configuration logic, bundle rules, legal entity rollup across subsidiaries, revenue recognition handoffs), Strkr integrates with Salesforce CPQ, Zuora CPQ, or Chargebee for the configuration layer. The proposal still drafts from Strkr with the CPQ output.

No interactive microsite

Proposals are structured documents, not Qwilr pages.

Qwilr pioneered the interactive-microsite proposal format. Strkr proposals are structured documents with pricing tables, text, images, and video embeds. For teams whose brand positioning requires an interactive-microsite style (common in creative agencies and brand-forward services), Strkr is a step back on that specific dimension.

Light native e-sig

DocuSign and PandaDoc are the enterprise path.

Strkr ships a lightweight native e-signature for standard proposals. For enterprise contracts needing audit trail evidence beyond the baseline, Strkr integrates with DocuSign and PandaDoc. Firms with heavy e-signature requirements should plan for one of those integrations rather than relying on the native layer.

No complex redlining

Legal redlining lives in Word or Icertis.

Strkr proposals support co-editing and suggested edits for sales-side collaboration. For heavy legal redlining with structured clause libraries and compliance review workflow, the legal team typically uses Word, Icertis, Ironclad, or a dedicated CLM. The redlined contract comes back to Strkr for signature and conversion.

Analytics are proposal-scoped

Not a buyer-intelligence platform.

Strkr proposal analytics cover open rate, time on page, section engagement, and link clicks. Deeper buyer-intelligence features (identity resolution, buying-committee mapping, intent-signal aggregation) are not in scope. Firms needing buyer-intelligence depth should layer a dedicated tool (6sense, Demandbase) alongside Strkr.

No printable binding

Hard-copy proposals need a PDF export plus printer.

Strkr proposals are built as web proposals first. The PDF export is first-class and the printed-binding workflow works on the PDF. Firms running a heavy hard-copy proposal motion (common in older construction or industrial sales) should know the web-first design shows up in the printed PDF compared to a tool designed printer-first.

Head-to-head

Strkr proposals vs standalone proposal tools head to head.

The comparison below is against the three most-sold standalone proposal tools (PandaDoc, Proposify, Qwilr) as of 2026. Data draws from team interviews with 18 sales orgs that moved off a standalone proposal tool.

Feature Strkr Standalone proposal tool
Data source for pricing CRM product catalog, single source of truth Separate product catalog in proposal tool
Draft context Inside the opportunity record Separate tool, re-authenticate
Engagement telemetry Surfaces on opportunity timeline Separate dashboard in proposal tool
Signature on close Converts opportunity to closed-won inline Webhook handshake, occasional drift
Template governance Shared with enablement library Separate template library
Approval workflow Discount and deal-size routing in-record Separate approval flow
E-signature path Native or DocuSign/PandaDoc integration Often requires separate signature vendor
Collaborative drafting Co-edit with inline notes and version history Varies; often lighter collaboration
Pricing-strip view Dedicated pricing strip with term toggles Pricing embedded in terms table
Draft-to-send time Roughly 15 minutes typical Roughly 45 minutes with context switching
How teams use Strkr

How teams run proposals on Strkr.

The playbooks below are live customer motions from teams that moved from a standalone proposal tool to Strkr. Numbers from pilots and the first wave of migrations.

SaaS, 30 reps

Finance stopped maintaining two price lists.

A 30-rep SaaS team ran PandaDoc for proposals and the CRM for pipeline. The product catalog lived in both tools and drifted monthly as finance updated the pricing on one side and the sales ops team mirrored it on the other. Finance measured roughly 4 hours a month of reconciliation. On Strkr the proposal pulls from the CRM catalog directly. The reconciliation disappeared and the quarterly pricing updates stopped being a two-tool coordination exercise.

Mid-market, 25 reps

Deal reviews moved to one data view.

A 25-rep mid-market team on Proposify had the proposal engagement data in the Proposify dashboard and the pipeline data in the CRM. Sales managers ran deal-review calls across two tools, which added roughly 10 minutes per deal to the review cadence. On Strkr the open-rate and section-engagement data surface on the opportunity timeline. The sales ops lead reclaimed roughly 2 hours a week of stitching the two views together and the deal-review conversation moved faster.

SaaS, 40 reps

Signed-but-open deals stopped happening.

A 40-rep SaaS team ran Qwilr for proposals with a DocuSign bolt-on. The DocuSign-to-CRM webhook occasionally dropped, leaving signed proposals in open-stage limbo. The finance team found 3 to 5 signed-but-open deals per quarter during the forecast reconciliation. On Strkr the inline conversion to closed-won on signature eliminated the drift entirely. Finance stopped running the monthly reconciliation and the forecast accuracy improved.

Enterprise, 60 reps

Compliance audit cleared on template governance.

A 60-rep enterprise sales team had maintained roughly 40 proposal templates across two tools (the enablement platform and the proposal vendor). The approved template on the enablement side was often not the latest on the proposal side. Compliance flagged the template drift at the annual audit as a legal-risk vector. On Strkr the template library is a single governed library in the CRM with approval workflow. The audit the next cycle cleared without comment and the sales enablement lead stopped running the quarterly template-sync project.

B2B services, 20 reps

Draft time dropped from 45 minutes to 15.

A 20-rep B2B services team measured the time to draft a proposal on the standalone tool at roughly 45 minutes end-to-end including context switching, data copy, and template search. On Strkr the draft-from-opportunity flow dropped the time to roughly 15 minutes. At a volume of roughly 30 proposals a week across the team, the ops lead sized the recovered productivity at 15 hours a week of rep time redirected to selling. The team closed 2 to 3 more deals a month on the reclaimed selling time.

Web proposals that live where the deal lives.

Start a 14-day trial. Draft from the opportunity, pricing from the product catalog, section-level engagement, DocuSign or PandaDoc integration, approval workflow, auto-close on signature, and a template library governed in the CRM.

Start free trial See pricing
Common questions

What buyers in this bucket ask most.

When does a team outgrow a standalone proposal tool?

Three common signals. First, pricing drift: finance is maintaining two product catalogs that drift between the CRM and the proposal tool. Second, open-rate visibility: sales managers are stitching the engagement data from the proposal tool with the pipeline data from the CRM for every deal review. Third, signature drift: the signed-to-closed handshake has dropped at least once per quarter, leaving deals in limbo. Any one of those is the right trigger to evaluate a CRM-native proposal tool. Teams crossing two of them usually already know the dual-tool state is costing more than it saves.

What does migration from PandaDoc, Proposify, or Qwilr look like?

Three phases. First, template migration: the top 10 to 20 templates typically carry 80 percent of volume. Strkr provides a migration tool for PandaDoc and Proposify that pulls templates with structure preserved. Qwilr templates typically require a reformat because the interactive-microsite model does not map directly. Second, in-flight proposals: proposals already in draft or sent stay in the old tool until signed or expired. New proposals start on Strkr. Third, template approval: the sales enablement team reviews the migrated library and prunes to the current approved set. Total elapsed time from kickoff to cutover is typically 4 to 6 weeks.

Does Strkr handle complex pricing with ramps, tiers, and multi-year contracts?

Yes for most ramp, tier, and multi-year patterns. Strkr product catalog supports tiered pricing, volume discount schedules, multi-year ramps, and standard discount tiers. The proposal pulls the right pricing automatically based on the opportunity line items. For complex CPQ needs (configuration logic across many product dependencies, bundle rules with legal-entity rollup, revenue-recognition handoffs), Strkr integrates with Salesforce CPQ, Zuora CPQ, or Chargebee for the configuration layer and the proposal still drafts from Strkr with the CPQ output.

How does the native e-signature compare to DocuSign?

Strkr native e-signature covers standard proposal signature flows (one or two signers, basic audit trail, timestamped signature events, email notification). For enterprise contracts with heavier audit-trail requirements, multiple signer coordination, counter-party review, or industry-specific compliance (life sciences, government), the DocuSign or PandaDoc integration is the recommended path. The native layer is designed for the roughly 60 to 70 percent of proposals that do not need the full e-signature feature set.

What proposal analytics does Strkr surface?

Open rate, open timestamp, time on page, time per section, link clicks, and signature events surface on the opportunity timeline directly. The data is available for every proposal sent and the sales manager can see which sections the buyer spent time on before the follow-up call. Deeper buyer-intelligence features (identity resolution, buying-committee mapping, intent signal aggregation) are not in scope and sit outside the proposal tool.

Can we send a Strkr proposal as a PDF for the buyer who prefers that?

Yes. Every Strkr proposal has a web URL and a PDF export. The web URL supports engagement telemetry (open rate, time on page, section tracking). The PDF export carries the pricing, terms, and signature line but does not track engagement. Teams typically send the web URL as the primary and offer the PDF for buyers who ask or for compliance archives. The PDF export is first-class, not an afterthought.

Also built for

Related audiences.

AI Proposal AI Proposal Writer AI Proposal Generator Accounting Proposal Software AI CRM Software All-in-One CRM B2B CRM

Try it free. Bring your team next week.

No sales call, no migration consultant, no four-month implementation. Enter your card, get 14 days of the full Pro tier, cancel any time before day 14 with zero charge. Spin up a workspace, import your CSV, and have something useful before lunch.

Start free trial See pricing