Compare two tools on my actual use case, not their feature lists

I'm choosing between [TOOL A] and [TOOL B] for [THE SPECIFIC JOB YOU NEED DONE].

What matters to me, in order: [YOUR TOP THREE — e.g. cost at my volume, data residency, how fast my team can learn it, whether it exports cleanly]
My constraints: [BUDGET, TEAM SIZE, EXISTING STACK, ANYTHING NON-NEGOTIABLE]
My actual volume: [BE SPECIFIC — per day, per month]

Don't give me a feature matrix. Both marketing pages have one and they're both true and neither helps.

1. THE ANSWER FIRST. Which one, for my case, in one sentence with the main reason.

2. WHERE THEY GENUINELY DIFFER for this job. Ignore everything they both do. Three or four real differences, maximum.

3. COST AT MY VOLUME, not per unit. Show the arithmetic. Include the thing people forget — minimums, seats, overage rates, annual-vs-monthly, and what happens when I exceed a tier.

4. THE LOCK-IN QUESTION. If I pick this and want out in eighteen months, what comes with me and what doesn't? Data, templates, integrations, institutional habit.

5. WHO SHOULD PICK THE OTHER ONE. Describe the person or situation where my answer flips. If I recognise myself in that description, I've learned something.

6. WHAT I HAVEN'T ASKED that I should have, given what I said matters to me.

Cite current sources for anything about pricing or limits, with dates — this stuff changes monthly and stale numbers are worse than none.

One more thing: use anything you already know about me from our past chats and anything you're connected to. If you can find it yourself, don't make me look it up.