Weflow vs. Einstein Activity Capture for Activity Logging: 2026 Comparison
Weflow is the stronger choice if you need activity data that behaves like real Salesforce data. For this comparison, the focus is Weflow Activity Capture at $19/user/month billed annually.
Weflow writes emails and meetings to native Salesforce objects by default, supports contact auto-creation, automates Opportunity Contact Roles, gives reps mapping control, supports historical backfill, and deploys centrally instead of relying on per-user OAuth.
Einstein Activity Capture is still a legitimate choice for small Salesforce teams under 100 users that just want basic email and calendar visibility on records. If you don’t need standard reports, Flows, OCR automation, custom object logging, or precise Opportunity association control, staying with EAC can be the rational decision.
But if you’ve already tried to make EAC work, you know the real issue usually isn’t “can I see an email on the timeline?” It’s whether the activity lands on the right Opportunity, whether missing Contacts create silent data gaps, and whether the data is usable in dashboards, automations, and downstream tools without migration workarounds. That’s where Weflow pulls ahead.
TL;DR: Weflow vs. Einstein Activity Capture
If you need reliable, reportable, automatable activity data in Salesforce, choose Weflow. If you’re under 100 users and only need basic visibility, Einstein Activity Capture is often good enough.
Quick comparison table
Dimension | Weflow | Einstein Activity Capture |
|---|---|---|
Primary use case / best fit | Mid-market and enterprise B2B teams that need reportable activity data, accurate Opportunity association, automation readiness, and low admin overhead | Small Salesforce teams under 100 users that want basic email and calendar visibility on records without buying another tool |
Data storage model | Writes emails as native Tasks or EmailMessages and meetings as native Events by default | Legacy orgs often still use external storage; mid-2025 introduced opt-in on-platform email storage as native EmailMessage or Task records |
Email logging accuracy | High completeness with contact auto-creation, multi-email matching, thread-level mapping persistence, and rep correction from inbox | Works for existing Leads and Contacts, but gaps remain when recipients don’t exist in Salesforce or activities map to the wrong record |
Calendar capture model | Creates one parent Event per meeting plus child Events per attendee for cleaner counts | Creates one Event per attendee, which can inflate activity metrics |
Opportunity association control | Explicit mapping rules plus rep override in Gmail Extension or Outlook Add-In; corrections persist across the thread | Algorithmic matching only; no native remapping UI and no OCR automation |
Contact auto-creation / OCR automation | Yes—optional contact creation and automatic Opportunity Contact Role assignment with admin controls | No contact auto-creation and no Opportunity Contact Role automation |
Custom object / Case mapping | Yes—logs activity against custom objects and Cases | Standard record matching today; custom object matching via Flows was announced, but GA is not confirmed; Cases remain unsupported |
Deployment model | Centralized admin deployment through Google Workspace App or Microsoft Entra ID App; no per-user OAuth required for capture | Each user must connect email and calendar individually via OAuth; admins manage assignments and reconnects |
Historical backfill | Up to 24 months as an add-on, plus deduplication with Outreach, Salesloft, and Apollo | No historical backfill; lower tiers may retain as little as 6 months of captured data |
Pricing at <100 users and >100 users | $19/user/month billed annually at any team size | <100 users: included in Sales Cloud. >100 users: additional paid SKU at about $50/user/month, plus possible reporting edition or add-on requirements |
Why this comparison matters
This isn’t a normal vendor-vs-vendor decision. The real question is whether Salesforce’s included option is finally good enough for your org, or whether you need a dedicated activity capture product built for data quality and admin control.
Most teams start with Einstein Activity Capture because it’s already there. That makes sense. You can turn it on, get basic timeline visibility, and avoid a procurement cycle.
The problem resurfaces later—usually when leadership asks for activity-based reporting, your Business Systems team tries to use activity data in Flows, or pipeline reviews start exposing deals with obviously wrong engagement history.
The trigger is rarely generic email visibility.
It’s Opportunity association reliability. If the wrong emails roll up to the wrong deal—or don’t roll up anywhere because the Contact doesn’t exist yet—your pipeline coverage metrics, inspection views, and forecast inputs stop being trustworthy.
What Einstein Activity Capture actually does today
Einstein Activity Capture is Salesforce’s native email, calendar, and contact sync feature. It passively syncs Gmail or Microsoft 365 activity into Salesforce and remains the default choice for teams that want lightweight visibility with minimal end-user behavior change. And since the 2025 on-platform update, it’s a more credible option than it was a year earlier.
What improved in EAC's 2025 on-platform update
On-platform email storage became possible. Captured emails can now be stored as native EmailMessage or Task records instead of living only in EAC’s external storage model. That means they can be reported on, queried, and used in Salesforce automation.
The biggest historical complaint got smaller. For orgs that complete the migration, EAC emails are no longer just a timeline visualization. They can become real Salesforce records.
Salesforce also signaled movement on custom object matching. Custom object matching via Flows was announced in 2025. That matters because it shows Salesforce knows standard object-only matching is too limiting for many orgs.
Admins now have a more realistic native path. If your use case is simple and your org can absorb the storage tradeoff, EAC is no longer automatically disqualified on reportability alone.
What still hasn't changed
The 2025 update mattered. It did not remove the structural gaps that drive most switch evaluations: migration complexity, storage tradeoffs, weak mapping control, missing contact creation, no OCR automation, and edition and pricing confusion once you scale.
Opt-in migration, not automatic
If you already run EAC, the move to on-platform storage is not automatic. Existing orgs must actively migrate, and that process requires Salesforce Support involvement. So there are still many orgs where leadership thinks EAC is now fully native while the actual deployment is still on the old model.
That matters because your admin reality depends on which architecture you’re actually on. Two teams can both say “we use EAC” and mean very different things from a reporting and automation standpoint.
Storage implications of on-platform email capture
Once EAC writes captured emails into native Salesforce storage, those records count against your org’s storage limits. That is the tradeoff for better reportability. For a smaller team, that may be manageable. For a larger sales org with heavy email volume, it becomes a real cost and governance issue.
So the 2025 update didn’t make reportability free. It shifted the cost from architectural limitation to Salesforce storage consumption.
Licensing and edition confusion
EAC is bundled across Sales Cloud editions, but the useful details aren’t simple. The standard sync capability is included for the first 100 users. Beyond 100 users, EAC requires an additional paid SKU at about $50/user/month. Activity 360 reporting requires Unlimited edition or an add-on path on Enterprise.
There’s also a separate scale constraint: Activity Metrics is disabled for orgs above 1.5 million records across Accounts, Contacts, Leads, Opportunities, and Contracts. So “it’s included” is true only in a narrow sense. Once you need scale, reporting, or advanced visibility, licensing gets messier fast.
How Weflow handles activity logging differently
Weflow is a Salesforce-native Revenue AI platform with three product lines—Activity Capture, Conversation Intelligence, and Deal Intelligence & Forecasting.
For this use case, the relevant product is Weflow Activity Capture. Its architectural difference is simple: it was built to write activity data into native Salesforce objects from the start, so the data is usable in Salesforce workflows from day one instead of after a migration project.
Native Salesforce object writeback by default
Weflow writes emails directly to native Salesforce objects—either Tasks or EmailMessages, depending on the admin configuration. Meetings are written as native Events, using one parent Event per meeting and child Events per attendee.
That gives you activity data you can use immediately in standard reports, dashboards, Flows, validation rules, SOQL queries, and any downstream integration that reads Salesforce activity data through the API.
There’s no opt-in storage model change, no dependency on whether Salesforce Support completed a migration, and no separate question about whether the timeline view reflects a real record. In Weflow, the record is the record.
How Weflow improves capture completeness and mapping accuracy
Most activity logging failures are not obvious failures. They’re silent completeness problems: a stakeholder isn’t in Salesforce yet, an email thread gets associated to the wrong Opportunity, or an engagement platform writes a duplicate record that distorts your metrics. Weflow addresses those problems at the data model level.
Contact auto-creation
When a rep emails or invites someone who does not yet exist in Salesforce, Weflow can optionally create the Contact automatically. That closes one of the biggest hidden gaps in activity completeness.
If the person isn’t in Salesforce, EAC can’t associate the activity to a real record. Weflow can.
Admins control how this works. You can restrict creation to existing Accounts only, exclude specific domains, and set participant thresholds so a webinar invite doesn’t create a flood of Contacts.
OCR automation
Weflow can automatically set Opportunity Contact Roles. That matters because Opportunity mapping is only reliable when Salesforce knows which Contacts are actually part of the deal.
Weflow’s Opportunity mapping follows explicit rules: it logs to an Opportunity only when the Opportunity is open and the Contact is an OCR, or when that Opportunity is the only open one under the Account.
In practice, that means your activity data reflects deal engagement instead of just account-level noise. Pipeline review metrics get cleaner because the activity is tied to the right revenue object.
Thread-level mapping persistence
When Weflow maps or remaps an email, that correction persists across the whole thread through the thread ID. You don’t fix one message and then watch the next reply land on the wrong record again.
This is a big difference in multi-stakeholder deals where recipients change over time. The thread stays attached to the intended Salesforce context instead of drifting with every reply.
Inbox-based unlog and re-log
As of February 2026, reps can unlog an email activity and re-log it to a different Salesforce record directly from the Outlook Add-In or Chrome Extension. That gives your sales team a practical way to correct bad associations without opening an admin ticket.
For RevOps, that means fewer cleanup requests and fewer long-lived mapping errors in Salesforce. The fix happens at the source, in the rep’s inbox, while the context is still fresh.
Custom object and Case mapping
Weflow can map activity to custom objects and Cases, not just Accounts, Contacts, Leads, and Opportunities. If your sales process depends on implementation objects, partner records, support workflows, or custom revenue objects, the activity can still land where your teams actually work.
EAC’s custom object direction is worth watching, but it is not the same as fully delivered, admin-controlled mapping today. Cases also remain a gap on the EAC side.
Historical backfill and deduplication with engagement tools
Weflow can sync historical activity for up to 24 months as an add-on. The backfill runs in batches to respect Salesforce API limits, which matters for larger orgs that want continuity without destabilizing the org.
It also includes compatibility mode for Outreach, Salesloft, and Apollo so you don’t double-log the same activity into Salesforce. That prevents inflated activity counts and keeps engagement metrics usable when your stack includes both activity capture and sequencing tools.
Head-to-head: where each tool wins
If your only question is “can I display emails on a Salesforce record,” the gap is smaller than it used to be. If your question is “can I trust this data in reporting, automation, and pipeline inspection,” the differences stay clear.
Native object architecture and reportability
Weflow’s model is straightforward: emails and meetings are written to native Salesforce objects by default. That means the data is available to report builders, Flows, SOQL queries, validation rules, and any third-party system that reads Salesforce activity records.
There is no split between what users see and what the platform can actually use.
EAC narrowed this gap in 2025 by adding on-platform email storage.
That was a real improvement. But it is still conditional: existing orgs must migrate, the migration is not automatic, and native storage now consumes Salesforce storage. If your org is still on the legacy architecture, the old reporting and API limitations still apply.
Verdict: Weflow wins on native object architecture and reportability because native writeback is the default state, not a post-migration option with storage tradeoffs.
Email logging accuracy and contact creation
Weflow captures a more complete dataset because it can auto-create Contacts when new external participants appear in email threads or calendar invites.
It also supports matching against multiple email addresses per record, which helps when contacts change companies or use alternate addresses.
EAC depends on the person already existing in Salesforce. If they don’t, the activity cannot be associated cleanly to the Contact, Account, or Opportunity context you need for reporting.
That creates silent gaps in activity completeness. And silent gaps are the hardest kind to diagnose because the missing activity never surfaces as an obvious failure.
Verdict: Weflow wins on email logging accuracy because contact auto-creation turns missing participants into usable Salesforce records instead of invisible activity loss.
Calendar sync and Opportunity association reliability
Both tools capture meetings, but they handle attribution differently. Weflow creates one parent Event per meeting and child Events per attendee, which produces cleaner counts.
More importantly, its Opportunity mapping follows explicit rules, supports OCR automation, and allows rep overrides from Gmail or Outlook when the association is wrong.
EAC captures meetings passively, but it creates one Event per attendee and relies on algorithmic matching that admins and reps cannot correct natively. That becomes a problem fast in accounts with multiple open deals, shared contacts, or long buying committees.
Verdict: Weflow wins on calendar sync and Opportunity association reliability because its mapping is rule-based, correctable, and built for multi-opportunity account complexity.
Admin deployment and ongoing maintenance
Weflow is deployed centrally through a Google Workspace Marketplace App or Microsoft Entra ID App using admin-granted permissions. Capture does not depend on each rep individually connecting their account.
Admins can enroll users dynamically into teams and configurations, and initial setup typically takes 20–40 minutes with a Salesforce admin plus a Google Workspace or Microsoft admin.
EAC requires each user to connect their mailbox and calendar via OAuth. That sounds manageable with 20 reps. It becomes an ongoing admin chore with 100 or 200. New user setup, disconnects, and missing activity investigations turn into recurring support work—especially in Microsoft 365 environments.
Weflow’s December 2025 disconnect notifications also make failures easier to catch before they create data gaps.
Verdict: Weflow wins on admin deployment and maintenance because centralized deployment removes the per-user connection burden that makes EAC expensive to support at scale.
Cost and total cost of ownership
EAC has a real price advantage for the first 100 users if your needs are basic. There is no reason to pretend otherwise. If you’re a small team and your only goal is timeline visibility, $0 incremental cost matters.
But that advantage disappears quickly. Beyond 100 users, EAC shifts to an additional paid SKU at about $50/user/month. The more advanced reporting path can also require Unlimited edition or add-ons.
Then add storage consumption from on-platform email capture and the ongoing admin time tied to per-user OAuth and troubleshooting.
Weflow Activity Capture stays flat at $19/user/month billed annually, with no implementation fees or usage-based charges, and it includes the mapping and completeness controls that EAC still lacks.
Verdict: Weflow wins on total cost of ownership because EAC is cheaper only in the sub-100-user, basic-visibility scenario—outside that window, you pay more for less control.
When Einstein Activity Capture is good enough
This is the part most comparison pages skip, and it matters. There are situations where staying with EAC is the right decision. If you’re in one of them, you should stay put.
Best-fit EAC scenarios
You’re under 100 users and cost is the deciding factor. EAC is included in Sales Cloud at that size, so the incremental license cost is hard to beat if your needs are simple.
Basic timeline visibility is enough. If leadership only wants to see that emails and meetings happened on Contact or Lead records, and nobody needs activity data in standard reports, Flows, or external tools, EAC can do that job.
You do not need contact creation, OCRs, or custom mapping. If your reps mostly work with already-clean Salesforce records and deal attribution does not depend on OCR discipline or custom objects, the missing controls may not hurt you yet.
Your security or procurement policy limits third-party tools. If you have strict vendor restrictions or a hard FedRAMP requirement, EAC inherits Salesforce’s authorization path and may be the only workable option.
When you've outgrown Einstein Activity Capture
Outgrowing EAC does not mean you made a bad decision earlier. It usually means your Salesforce org now depends on activity data for more than basic visibility. That’s the point where native “good enough” stops being good enough.
Operational signs EAC is no longer enough
Your team is nearing or past 100 users. This is the cleanest switch trigger because EAC’s pricing changes and the “included” argument falls apart.
You need activity data in reports, Flows, or third-party tools. If activity needs to drive automation or analytics, conditional reportability is no longer enough.
Opportunity association issues are distorting pipeline metrics. If deals with heavy engagement show weak activity history, your mapping model is failing where it matters most.
You’re missing activity because recipients don’t exist in Salesforce yet. New buying committee members should not disappear from your measurable engagement dataset.
You run Outreach, Salesloft, or Apollo and fight duplicate activity records. If your team is doing deduplication work by hand or with fragile Flows, the stack has outgrown EAC.
You need historical backfill or remapping. If you want to recover past activity or correct bad associations at scale, EAC does not give you a clean path.
Pricing breakdown: where the "free" argument holds
The “Salesforce already includes this” argument is real for smaller teams. It just stops being real much sooner than most internal buyers expect.
Cost at 50 users
Tool | Directional annual cost | What that buys you |
|---|---|---|
Einstein Activity Capture | $0 incremental | Basic bundled email and calendar visibility for teams under 100 users |
Weflow Activity Capture | $11,400/year | Native writeback, contact auto-creation, OCR automation, custom mapping, centralized deployment, and backfill option |
At 50 users, EAC’s price advantage is real. If you only need record-level visibility, it is hard to justify switching. Weflow is the better product here, but it is not the cheaper line item.
Cost at 100 users
Tool | Directional annual cost | What changes here |
|---|---|---|
Einstein Activity Capture | $0 incremental at the threshold | You are at the pricing cliff; the next stage of growth changes the economics and often the admin burden |
Weflow Activity Capture | $22,800/year | Flat pricing continues with no edition cliff and no shift in deployment model |
At 100 users, EAC still looks cheaper on paper. But this is the last point where the “free” framing stays intact. If you already know you need reportable activity data, mapping control, or cleaner admin operations, waiting until user 101 usually just delays an inevitable switch.
Cost at 200 users
Tool | Directional annual cost | Economic reality |
|---|---|---|
Einstein Activity Capture | About $120,000/year | Paid SKU removes the native price advantage, while storage and admin overhead still remain |
Weflow Activity Capture | $45,600/year | Lower license cost with deeper mapping, automation, and data completeness controls |
At 200 users, this stops being a subtle tradeoff. Weflow is materially less expensive than EAC for activity capture and gives you more control over data quality.
What switching from EAC to Weflow looks like
Most switch hesitation comes down to migration anxiety: setup effort, historical continuity, and fear of losing data. Those are reasonable concerns. They’re also more manageable than they look.
Setup and deployment model
Connect Salesforce and your mail system centrally. A Salesforce admin works with a Google Workspace admin or Microsoft admin to grant the needed permissions through the Workspace App or Entra ID App.
Choose your Salesforce writeback model. Admins decide whether emails should be stored as Tasks or EmailMessages, configure calendar sync behavior, set exclusions, and define team-specific rules.
Enroll users centrally. Users are added to teams and configurations by admin policy instead of connecting one by one through OAuth.
Verify mapping and go live. Initial setup typically takes 20–40 minutes, and rollout is measured in weeks, not quarters, because you are not chasing individual mailbox connections.
The admin experience is simpler than EAC at scale because the ongoing work shifts from connection maintenance to policy management.
Historical backfill and data continuity
Weflow can backfill historical activity for up to 24 months as an add-on. That backfill runs in batches to stay within Salesforce API limits, which matters if you’re rolling out across larger teams.
Your existing EAC history depends on how EAC stored it. If your org already migrated to on-platform storage, those native records remain in Salesforce. If your org is still on EAC’s legacy external model, the activity you saw in the timeline was never stored as standard Salesforce activity records in the first place.
Weflow does not remove that history—it starts writing native records going forward and can backfill prior history from the source systems.
What happens to data if you ever stop using Weflow
All data written by Weflow stays in Salesforce because it lives in native Salesforce objects. Emails remain as Tasks or EmailMessages. Meetings remain as Events. Contacts created by Weflow remain Contacts.
That matters for trust and total cost of ownership. You are not renting a separate activity database that disappears when the subscription ends. The data stays in your org.
Decision framework: which fits your situation?
If you need a quick recommendation you can take into an internal discussion, use the tables below. They map the tool choice to the actual operating condition, not a generic feature checklist.
By primary need
Primary need | Recommended tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
Basic email and meeting visibility on Salesforce records | Einstein Activity Capture | If you are under 100 users and do not need reports or automation on the activity data, the bundled option is usually enough |
Reportable activity data for dashboards and board-facing metrics | Weflow | Native writeback is the default, so activity is immediately available in reports, Flows, and API-based tools |
Accurate Opportunity association for pipeline inspection | Weflow | Explicit mapping rules, OCR automation, and rep remapping beat algorithm-only association |
Automatic creation of missing Contacts | Weflow | EAC cannot create the Salesforce records needed to make that activity measurable |
Logging activity to Cases or custom objects | Weflow | Weflow supports both today; EAC does not offer the same delivered mapping scope |
By team profile
Team profile | Recommended tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
Under 10 users | Einstein Activity Capture | Weflow has a 10-user minimum, so EAC is the practical option |
10–50 users with one admin and light reporting needs | Einstein Activity Capture | The bundled price advantage is strongest here if your process is simple |
100–200 users with growing RevOps requirements | Weflow | The pricing cliff, mapping errors, and admin overhead make EAC harder to justify |
Lean admin team that cannot spend time on reconnects and cleanup | Weflow | Centralized deployment removes a large category of support work |
Dedicated RevOps or Business Systems team building automation on activity data | Weflow | The value comes from activity data being usable everywhere in Salesforce from day one |
By current stack
Current stack | Recommended tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
Salesforce only, basic Sales Cloud deployment | Einstein Activity Capture | If your needs are limited to visibility and you are under 100 users, the native path is fine |
Salesforce + Outreach | Weflow | Compatibility mode helps prevent duplicate activity logging and metric inflation |
Salesforce + Salesloft | Weflow | Deduplication and native writeback keep activity data usable for reporting |
Salesforce + Apollo | Weflow | Coexistence without double logging matters if Apollo is also writing activity into Salesforce |
Salesforce with custom objects or Case-centric workflows | Weflow | EAC’s standard-object bias becomes a hard limit in more complex org designs |
What changed since last year
EAC added on-platform email storage. Captured emails can now become native EmailMessage or Task records. That improves reportability, but only after an opt-in migration and with Salesforce storage implications.
EAC moved closer to custom object matching, but the gap is not closed. Salesforce announced custom object matching via Flows in 2025, yet the delivered state still does not match Weflow’s current custom object and Case mapping coverage.
Activity Metrics scale limits are still a real constraint. The feature remains disabled above 1.5 million records, which keeps it unreliable as a planning assumption for larger Salesforce orgs.
Weflow released unlog and re-log. Since February 2026, reps can correct a wrong email association from the Outlook Add-In or Chrome Extension instead of waiting for admin cleanup.
Weflow improved admin reliability controls. Integration user disconnect notifications, added in December 2025, make silent capture failures easier to catch before they become reporting gaps.
Methodology
This comparison is based on current product documentation, release notes, pricing pages, and hands-on evaluation of how both products behave in real Salesforce admin workflows. The focus is intentionally narrow: email logging, calendar capture, reportability, mapping accuracy, deployment effort, coexistence with engagement tools, and cost at different team sizes.
It does not score conversation intelligence, forecasting, or broader revenue platform breadth. Those matter in larger buying decisions, and Weflow also offers them through its Conversation Intelligence bundle at $49/user/month billed annually and full Revenue AI platform at $79/user/month billed annually. But for this article, the question is simpler: do you stay with Salesforce’s included activity capture, or switch to a purpose-built option?
FAQ
Is Einstein Activity Capture finally reportable in Salesforce now?
It can be, but only if your org is on the 2025 on-platform storage model. That migration is opt-in for existing EAC deployments and requires Salesforce Support, so not every org has actually made the move. Weflow’s difference is that native writeback is the default starting point, not a migration state.
Does Einstein Activity Capture log emails to the correct Opportunity reliably?
Not reliably enough for complex deal environments. EAC uses algorithmic matching based on email address context, and there is no native remapping interface when it gets the Opportunity wrong. That becomes a recurring problem when the same Contact is active across multiple open deals.
What happens in EAC when a rep emails someone who is not yet a Salesforce Contact?
EAC cannot associate that email to a Contact that does not exist. The activity may be captured, but it will not become a clean, reportable record tied to the right Salesforce objects. That creates a silent completeness gap in your activity dataset.
Can Einstein Activity Capture auto-create Contacts or set Opportunity Contact Roles?
No. EAC does not auto-create Contacts and does not automate Opportunity Contact Role assignment. Weflow covers both, which is why it produces cleaner Opportunity-level engagement data.
Is Weflow worth paying for if EAC is included in Salesforce?
It depends on team size and data requirements. If you are under 100 users and only need basic visibility, EAC may be enough. If you need reportable, automatable activity data with accurate Opportunity mapping and fewer admin headaches, Weflow’s $19/user/month billed annually is usually easy to justify.
What changes after 100 users on Einstein Activity Capture pricing?
The bundled cost advantage ends. Beyond 100 users, EAC requires an additional paid SKU at about $50/user/month, which is the clearest point where teams start comparing alternatives. That is why many RevOps teams re-evaluate EAC right around the 100-user mark.
Can Weflow coexist with Outreach, Salesloft, or Apollo without creating duplicate activities?
Yes. Weflow includes a compatibility mode designed to deduplicate activity when those engagement tools are also writing into Salesforce. That keeps activity counts and engagement metrics from being inflated by double logging.
If I switch from EAC to Weflow, do I lose historical activity data?
Not by default. If your EAC history is already stored on-platform, those native Salesforce records remain in place. Weflow can also backfill up to 24 months of historical activity from the source systems, and any data it writes to Salesforce stays in your org even if you later stop using Weflow.
