Log inStart Free Trial

EasyCoexistence vs a BSP inbox

A BSP sells a platform: a shared inbox your team works in, with messages stored on their servers. Coexistence keeps the WhatsApp Business app on the phone and routes messages wherever you nominate. The choice is whether you want a product to work in or a connection to build on.

What does a BSP actually give you?

A product, and that is not a criticism.

A Business Solution Provider typically sells a shared inbox: agents log in, conversations are assigned, there are canned replies, tags, reporting and a mobile app. For a support team of eight people who need to divide work and see who answered what, that is genuinely the right purchase, and building it yourself would be foolish.

The architectural consequence is that messages pass through and are stored on their platform, because a shared inbox cannot exist otherwise. It needs the history to show it. That is inherent to the product rather than a choice a particular vendor made.

CoexistenceA BSP inbox
Where the team answersThe WhatsApp Business app they already useThe provider's inbox
Where messages are storedYour systems, or nowhereOn the provider's platform
What you are buyingA connectionA place to work
Fit for a support team of eightPoor without building somethingGood, that is what it is for
Fit for an agency holding client numbersGoodDepends on the client accepting a new tool
LeavingDisconnect the numberExport, and the history lives there

When is Coexistence the better fit?

When the number belongs to a business that already has a way of working, and nobody wants to change it.

A small team answering from one phone does not need conversation assignment. They need the evenings back, which means something automatic handling confirmations and first replies while the phone keeps working exactly as it does. Moving them into an inbox solves a problem they do not have and creates one they did not ask for.

An agency has the same shape for a different reason. Clients will not migrate their number or retrain their staff, and often will not accept their conversations sitting on a third party platform at all. Coexistence is the only official route that asks nothing of them.

Which one is right if you are building the software?

Coexistence, almost always, and the reason is structural rather than about features.

If you are building the thing that handles conversations, a BSP inbox is a competitor to what you are building and a layer between you and Meta. You end up integrating against their abstraction rather than the Cloud API, which means their rate limits, their webhook shape, their release schedule and their pricing on top of Meta's.

With Coexistence the webhook goes to your endpoint and the API calls are Meta's own, documented by Meta. Nothing about the integration is specific to a vendor, which is also what makes it possible to leave.

Frequently asked questions

Can I use both?

In effect yes, if a BSP supports Coexistence. The question to ask them is where conversation content is stored, because that is what actually differs.

Is a BSP more reliable?

Both run on Meta's Cloud API, so delivery is the same. What differs is how many parties sit between Meta and your system.

Which is cheaper?

Usually a flat connection fee is less than per seat inbox pricing, but they are different purchases and comparing the numbers alone is misleading.

What happens to my history if I leave?

With Coexistence it was never held by us. With a platform it lives there, and getting it out is an export.

Keep reading

Ready to get started?

Set up WhatsApp Coexistence in minutes, not months. The app keeps working on the phone.

Start Free TrialNothing charged for 3 days. Cancel anytime.

Verified on

Product names and trademarks belong to their owners. EasyCoexistence is not affiliated with the companies compared here, and their prices are as published on their own sites on the date above.

Coexistence vs a BSP Inbox