Fin vs Tidio (Lyro): Detailed Comparison (2026)

Fin and Tidio’s Lyro are both used to apply AI to customer support, but they are optimized for different team sizes, operating models, and definitions of success.

The choice between them typically comes down to resolution depth, control, and how much complexity a team needs AI to handle as support volume and workflows grow.

This comparison explains where each platform fits best and how teams decide between a resolution-first AI agent system and chat-focused automation.

What is Fin?

Product overview

Fin is Intercom’s AI agent for customer service. It is designed to resolve customer issues end to end, including complex, multi-step workflows such as refunds, account changes, cancellations, and technical troubleshooting.

Fin operates within Intercom’s customer service platform and can also integrate into existing helpdesk environments, allowing teams to upgrade AI capabilities without replacing their current setup.

Primary capabilities

• Autonomous resolution of simple and complex customer queries
• Action execution across connected systems
• No-code configuration using prompts, workflows, and data connectors
• Built-in testing, monitoring, and performance optimization
• Seamless escalation and handoff to human agents

Typical use cases

• Support teams optimizing for resolution rate, CSAT, and cost per resolution
• Organizations that want AI to replace frontline resolution rather than only assist agents
• Teams that need direct control over AI behavior and continuous improvement

What is Tidio (Lyro)?

Product overview

Lyro is the AI agent offered by Tidio, a company best known for live chat and chatbot tools. Lyro is positioned as a chat-first AI automation tool focused on answering customer questions using company-provided content.

Lyro is typically deployed on websites or within Tidio’s chat environment. It may integrate with other helpdesks but does not function as a full customer support platform on its own.

Primary capabilities

• Chat-first AI agent for automated responses
• Content-grounded answers using FAQs, website pages, and Q&A pairs
• Basic action execution through integrations
• Configurable escalation to human agents
• Simple analytics focused on conversations and deflection

Typical use cases

• Small and mid-sized teams seeking fast time to value for chat automation
• Ecommerce and DTC businesses handling high volumes of repetitive questions
• Teams prioritizing deflection and response speed over complex resolution

Key differences between Fin and Tidio (Lyro)

Scope and focus

Fin is built specifically for customer support resolution across channels and workflows.

Lyro is focused on chat-based automation and answering common questions.

Operating model

Fin is self-serve and owned by support teams. Configuration, testing, and optimization happen directly in the product.

Lyro emphasizes simplicity and speed, with fewer controls and less depth for complex scenarios.

Resolution depth

Fin is designed to resolve multi-step, high-impact support issues and confirm outcomes.

Lyro is best suited for straightforward inquiries and deflection use cases.

Platform scope

Fin operates as a complete AI agent system for customer support. It can run within Intercom’s platform or integrate into an existing helpdesk, centralizing resolution, governance, and performance improvement.

Lyro operates as a chat automation layer and requires a separate system for inbox management, routing, and advanced reporting.

Fin vs Tidio (Lyro) comparison table

How teams choose between Fin and Tidio (Lyro)

Teams typically choose Fin when:

• Customer support resolution quality is a core business concern
• Automation must extend into complex or sensitive workflows
• They want full control over AI behavior and performance
• Cost per resolution and repeat contact reduction matter

Teams typically choose Tidio (Lyro) when:

• Speed and simplicity are more important than depth
• Chat is the primary or only support channel
• Most inquiries are repetitive and low-risk
• The team prefers minimal setup and ongoing maintenance

Frequently asked questions

Is Tidio (Lyro) a direct competitor to Fin?

Tidio (Lyro) appears in some of the same evaluations, but it targets simpler chat automation use cases. Fin is built for deeper resolution and broader support workflows.

Can Tidio (Lyro) replace a helpdesk?

No. Lyro focuses on chat automation and requires a separate system for inbox management, reporting, and advanced routing.

Which platform is easier to get started with?

Tidio (Lyro) is typically faster to deploy for basic chat automation. Fin requires more upfront configuration but delivers greater long-term flexibility and outcomes.

Which platform scales better as support complexity grows?

Fin scales better as workflows, channels, and business rules become more complex. Lyro is best suited to early-stage or simpler environments.

Do both platforms support human handoff?

Yes. Both support escalation to human agents, but Fin is designed to preserve context and routing across more complex support scenarios.

Compare resolution-first AI with chat automation

Tidio (Lyro) is built for fast, chat-based automation. Fin is designed to resolve customer support issues end to end, with full control, governance, and predictable cost per resolution as complexity grows.

If you want to see how resolution-first AI works in real support operations, start a Fin trial to evaluate resolution rates and repeat contact reduction, or book a demo to walk through complex workflows beyond basic chat automation.