Summary
Status: Omnipresent was acquired by Deel in October 2025. Its customers were migrated to Deel, and Omnipresent is no longer sold as a standalone EOR. So the live question is G-P (about $800/mo, mostly owned across ~180 markets) versus staying on Deel ($599/mo list, 150+ countries). Public-source figures below, not product testing.
What changed
| G-P | Omnipresent (before October 2025) | Deel (where Omnipresent customers now sit) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Status | Available | Acquired by Deel; customers migrated | Available |
| Published price | ~$800/mo per employee | Listed $499/mo (no longer sold) | $599/mo per employee |
| Coverage | ~180 countries | Claimed ~160 countries | 150+ countries |
| Entity model | Mostly owned | Was ~15 owned EU; partner elsewhere | Says it owns entities in 130+ countries; confirm per country |
| Best for | Global owned enterprise programs | n/a | Multi-region speed, contractors |
What former Omnipresent customers should do
- Review your Deel contract terms: fee, FX markup, deposit, notice period, and any carried-over Omnipresent pricing.
- Confirm the employer per country: get legal employer names in writing for each country your team sits in.
- Pick G-P if: counsel requires owned entities beyond Western Europe or a global owned program is already on the board pack.
- Stay on Deel if: migrated terms are fine and you value mid-market speed and contractors ($49/mo) in one platform.
- Pick neither if: owned entities inside 90+ countries are enough (Remote at $699/mo), or the lowest partner fee wins (Remofirst). Full list: Omnipresent alternatives.
Year-1 cost scenario
Assume 15 employees in France (5), Germany (5), Netherlands (5):
| Option | Seat assumption | Year-1 platform fees |
|---|---|---|
| Omnipresent list (historical, no longer sold) | $499 × 15 × 12 | $89,820 |
| Deel list | $599 × 15 × 12 | $107,820 |
| G-P estimate | $800 × 15 × 12 | $144,000 |
Published gap, G-P over Deel: about $36,180/year. That only pencils for G-P if owned continuity across a wide map is a hard requirement within the contract term. Document exit terms either way.
Entity model
Omnipresent cleared owned checks inside its EU core and used partners elsewhere. After migration, that map is Deel’s: Deel says it owns entities in 130+ countries, so confirm who employs each of your people. G-P’s public story is owned continuity across about 180 markets (with frontier exceptions called out in diligence).
Onboarding is not G-P’s advantage in a France-only sprint. G-P’s advantage is global owned scale and enterprise machinery once the program spans dozens of countries.
Diligence checklist
Ask for a written owned-vs-partner matrix for every country on your 12-month plan, employer legal names with registration numbers, deposit and FX terms, and start-date SLAs. Force both quotes into the same spreadsheet columns before you pick. Do not treat a sales map as proof.
If counsel requires owned entities in every market you hire, score G-P higher as soon as one market on the plan sits in a Deel partner entity.
Compiled verdict (public sources)
Compiled from public sources: Omnipresent is now part of Deel and cannot be bought on its own. G-P is the global owned buy; Deel is the multi-region default former Omnipresent customers already sit on. Do not romanticize either brand past the country list.
Full write-ups: G-P review, Omnipresent review. Next steps: G-P alternatives, Omnipresent alternatives.
How to run the bake-off without wasting a quarter
Run identical salary bands and start dates through both quotes. Require employer legal names for every country on the 12-month plan. Score four rows separately: entity risk, total cost, speed/UX, and systems fit. Do not let a single demo anecdote overwrite the matrix. If one vendor cannot clear a must-have country in writing, that vendor is out regardless of fee.
Put migration and exit clauses in the MSA before you celebrate year-one savings. Re-hiring employees onto a new EOR is a real project in Germany, Brazil, and France. Budget weeks to months, not a soft cutover.
When this comparison is the wrong shortlist
If your buying committee is really shopping US HRIS unification, owned-global enterprise delivery, or absolute cheapest partner coverage, stop forcing this head-to-head. Route those briefs to Rippling, G-P/Atlas/Remote, or Remofirst respectively. A clean “neither” answer beats a forced winner that fails the actual statement of work in month three.
Practical buying notes for 2026
Published seat fees are only the start of year-one cost. Confirm deposits, FX spreads, implementation fees, and benefits admin in the same columns for both vendors. A $50–$100 seat gap can vanish after FX on a $120K salary corridor, or after a single deposit month on a 20-person rollout.
Support quality is not a logo. Ask for escalation paths for contested terminations and payroll corrections in your top two markets. If your People team is thin, prefer the vendor whose mid-market playbooks absorb edge cases. If you have strong HR ops and a hard burn target, fee can decide after entity identity clears counsel.
Do not sign a multi-year MSA on a coverage map you have not validated in writing for the next four countries on the hiring plan. Coverage surprises are the most expensive failure mode in this category, more expensive than reconciling two systems or paying a higher seat for three quarters.
Total cost traps to price before signature
Model at least one contested termination scenario in your highest-risk market and ask both vendors who owns the local process end to end. Model FX on your actual currency mix for a quarter, not a demo average. Model whether contractors will live in the same system as employees. Those three traps erase more “wins” than list-price spreads between mature vendors.
If volume discounts are on the table, get them in writing against committed headcount bands. Verbal “we can get to $X at 20 seats” is not a commercial term. Annual billing concessions should be scored against cash constraints, not assumed free.
Negotiation posture that actually moves the number
Ask both vendors for committed-headcount bands at 10, 25, and 50 seats on annual billing. Ask whether deposits apply by country or globally. Ask whether FX is mid-market plus a disclosed spread or a worse opaque rate. Those three answers change year-one cost more than another product-tour slide.
If you already have leverage (multi-year term, competitive bake-off, or public peer pricing), use it on deposits and FX first, then seat fee. A lower seat with a worse FX corridor can lose money on high-salary markets. Keep the spreadsheet boring and identical across vendors.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can we still buy Omnipresent instead of G-P?
No. Deel acquired Omnipresent in October 2025 and migrated its customers to Deel. Omnipresent is not sold as a standalone EOR and its $499/mo list price no longer applies. Compare G-P (around $800/mo, mostly owned across ~180) with Deel ($599/mo, 150+) or Remote ($699/mo, owned in 90+). See Omnipresent alternatives.
We were an Omnipresent customer and may go global in 18 months. Stay on Deel or move to G-P?
If the next 18 months stay EU-heavy and your migrated Deel terms are fine, staying avoids a re-hire project. If counsel needs owned continuity across a wide global map, G-P earlier can be cheaper than migrating twice. Either way, get per-country employer names from Deel in writing first.
Our counsel requires owned entities in every market we hire. Who survives that filter?
G-P for wide maps, Remote inside its 90+ countries. Deel says it owns entities in 130+ countries but uses partners elsewhere, so check each country on your plan. If your policy is literally global owned-only, G-P’s ~180 owned network is the match and you pay around $800/mo for it.
How big is the fee gap for a mid-size EU pod?
On 15 employees, G-P at about $800/mo versus Deel at $599/mo list is roughly $36,180 a year. That only pencils for G-P if you need owned coverage or enterprise controls Deel doesn’t give you in writing. Ask for a quote with deposits, FX, and implementation fees before you annualize either number.
Does G-P onboard faster than Deel in France?
Not reliably. Deel’s mid-market motion is usually quicker for standard hires. G-P’s advantage is global owned scale (~180) and enterprise machinery at around $800/mo, not winning a one-country France sprint. A France-only pilot should not set policy for a wide owned rollout.
Before choosing a provider, review how to negotiate EOR pricing and country hiring guides for local cost and compliance context.
Sources
Related Decision Pages
Was this page helpful?
Tell us or send a correction.