D-Tools Cloud Ideas Portal

We actually read these.

Ideas submitted here go to the product team, not into a void. Add yours, vote on others, and comment on what matters to your business.

Talk to our Product Managers live: every other Monday, 1:00–2:00 PM ET → https://www.d-tools.com/cloud-product-office-hours

Add a new idea Subscribe
Status Under consideration
Categories CRM
Created by Dave Kirn
Created on May 9, 2026

RELATED IDEAS

True bidirectional HubSpot integration (deals, contacts, status, dollar values)

Problem

The HubSpot integration today is — at best — a one-way push, and even that is unreliable in practice. For shops running HubSpot as their primary CRM, the missing bidirectional sync means every deal lives in two systems, and salespeople end up updating both by hand on every change. The "integration" stops working as an integration the moment a real workflow tests it.

Required capability

  • HubSpot deal ↔ platform opportunity sync, both directions, near real-time.
  • Contact and account sync so a deal in HubSpot creates the platform-side client record (and vice versa).
  • Common fields propagate: site address, building type, market sector, project type, opportunity owner, total dollar value.
  • Status sync: created / presented / signed / lost states translate cleanly between the two systems.
  • Conflict resolution rules for the inevitable both-sides-edited case.
  • Field-mapping configuration so each tenant can decide how their HubSpot fields line up with the platform's opportunity fields.

Why it matters

Mid-size integrators frequently land on HubSpot as their first real CRM well before they pick a vertical-specific tool. The platform doesn't need to replace HubSpot; it needs to integrate with it well enough that customers don't feel forced to choose. Today they choose — and a HubSpot-using shop either skips the platform's CRM features or skips HubSpot for opportunity tracking. Either path leaves real value on the table.

An equivalent integration to Salesforce is a natural follow-up; the design choices and field-mapping infrastructure carry over.

  • Attach files
  • Guest
    Oct 7, 2026

    Has anyone built this sync themselves while waiting on a native version?

    We're migrating from Salesforce to HubSpot. Today, we run a bidirectional Salesforce and D-Tools Cloud sync through an iPaaS (Flowgear) covering opportunities, quotes, and quote lines. Since we're still building out our HubSpot environment, we have a chance to design it around the sync instead of retrofitting later. I'd like to learn from anyone who has done the HubSpot version:

    1. Trigger model. Did you use D-Tools webhooks, or poll on fromModifiedDate? How close to real time did you get?

    2. Record identity. Where do you store the cross-system ID? A custom HubSpot deal property holding the D-Tools opportunity ID, or a separate crosswalk table in your middleware?

    3. Status mapping. How did you map HubSpot deal stages to D-Tools opportunity states, especially custom pipelines with more or less stages than D-Tools has?

    4. Conflict rule. When both sides change, who wins? We settled on field-level ownership: the CRM owns identity and stage, D-Tools owns quote detail and dollar values. Did anyone try last-write-wins and regret it?

    5. Rate limits. Did you hit API limits on either side during bulk updates?

    6. HubSpot setup. If you could redo your HubSpot build, what would you set up differently to make the sync easier? Custom properties, pipeline stages, picklist values that match D-Tools, anything else?

    Happy to share what worked and what broke on the Salesforce side if it helps anyone building the HubSpot version.

    Reply