2 categories · RankedAutoRFP.ai
AutoRFP.ai is proposal software from AutoRFP that generates AI drafts of responses to requests for proposals · autorfp.ai ↗
Strongest at enterprise. Ranked 8 of 67 for mid-market buyers.
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
PandaDoc is first at 30%.
Loopio is first at 31%. 0 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
Responsive is first at 60%.
Why models recommend it
“AutoRFP.ai offers flexible, transparent pricing and project-based plans suitable for variable workloads”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Budget-constrained question · first choice
“Choose AutoRFP.ai or Inventive AI when speed and low implementation effort matter more than deep governance.”Perplexity Sonar · Comparative question · alternative
“AutoRFP.ai and Inventive AI are the strongest starting points because they are fast, affordable, and easy to run”Claude Haiku 4.5 · Budget-constrained question · alternative
“If your team mainly needs fast drafting: look at AutogenAI, Inventive, or AutoRFP.ai.”GPT-5.4 mini · Comparative question · alternative
What gives them pause
“Avoid enterprise tools like Responsive (formerly RFPIO), Loopio, or full AutoRFP.ai”Grok 4.20 · Budget-constrained question · warning
“often heavy on marketing claims, but users report it struggles with complex, multi-format compliance matrices”DeepSeek V4 Flash · Negative question · warning
“pricing is reportedly about $899/month, so it is less suitable for a tight budget”Perplexity Sonar · Budget-constrained question · warning
“though it has less established market history than Loopio”Perplexity Sonar · Direct question · warning
Also on the shortlist
The products named in the same answers as AutoRFP.ai, over the 86 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 79 | 22 | Compare → | |
| 74 | 28 | Compare → | |
| 46 | 2 | View → | |
| 35 | 0 | View → | |
| 33 | 5 | Compare → | |
| 21 | 5 | Compare → | |
| 20 | 1 | Compare → | |
| 16 | 0 | View → | |
| 16 | 0 | View → | |
| 15 | 0 | Compare → |
What the models named instead of AutoRFP.ai →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
At a glance
Stated on AutoRFP.ai's own site, not checked by Gane.
- For
- global teams
- Price stated
- $899, $1299
- Starting price
- 899
- Free plan or trial
- 30-day money-back guarantee
- Integrations
- 18
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR, UK GDPR, CCPA, EU Cloud Code of Conduct
- Hosting
- US, EU, AU, US West (Oregon), EU Central (Frankfurt), Australia East (Sydney)
- Customers named
- SugarAI, Workforce.com, fintechOS, perk, Jobylon, IMTC, Red Rover, MedeAnalytics
How this is measured
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Sources returned with these answers
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted. These counts come from 81 of the 86 answers that named AutoRFP.ai and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
269 of the 305 domain citations in answers naming AutoRFP.ai came from a third party's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
What it publishes
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 150 | 20 | 2026-09-14 | Proposals | |
| Comparison | 28 | 14 | 2026-09-16 | ||
| Case study | 14 | 1 | 2026-08-18 | ||
| Conference or event | 7 | 2 | 2026-10-15 | ||
| Template or tool | 4 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 3 | 0 | 2026-04-15 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-16Best govwin alternatives comparison
- 2026-09-141up pricing blog
- 2026-09-14How Much Does AutogenAI Cost in 2026? blog
- 2026-09-14Iris pricing blog
- 2026-09-14Responsive vs autogenai comparison comparison
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page autorfp.ai exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.