Index › HR › Core HR and payroll › HRIS and HCM platforms › Gusto vs Paylocity
HRIS and HCM platforms · November 2026 Edition

Gusto vs Paylocity

Zero of fourteen models named Gusto first on the direct prompt; zero named Paylocity. Gusto was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Paylocity by twelve and Gusto carries 43 labels and Paylocity 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Gusto

accepted challenger

Named in twenty-one categories this edition.

Paylocity

accepted challenger

Named in nineteen categories this edition.

First-choice share6%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate21%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#7A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels4331A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Gusto reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Rippling was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Rippling vs Gusto · Rippling vs Paylocity · Zoho People vs Gusto

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the HRIS and HCM platforms page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
GustoFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPaylocity
Direct001 against Gusto
Paraphrase011 against Gusto
Comparative00
Budget-constrained30
Scale-constrained011 against Gusto
Negative006 against Gusto · 3 against Paylocity
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Gusto and Paylocity were named in the same answer eighty-eight times, of the 855 answers naming Gusto and the 279 naming Paylocity. In those answers Paylocity took the first choice four times and Gusto thirteen.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Gusto and Paylocity stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Gusto Paylocity first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Gusto on the left and Paylocity on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Gusto and Paylocity stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

9 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashRippling alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, HiBob, Paylocity
Perplexity SonarRippling alternatives: HiBob, Paycom, Paylocity
Grok 4.20HiBob, Rippling alternatives: BambooHR, Paylocity
DeepSeek V4 FlashRippling alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, BambooHR, HiBob, Paylocity
Qwen 3.7 FlashHiBob, Rippling alternatives: BambooHR, Deel, Gusto, Paylocity, Remote, UKG Pro, Zoho People
Kimi K2BambooHR, Rippling alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, HiBob, Paylocity
GLM 4.7 FlashXRippling alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, BambooHR, HiBob, Paylocity
MiniMax M2.5BambooHR alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, HiBob, Paylocity, Rippling
Muse Glimmer 30BBambooHR alternatives: ADP Workforce Now, HiBob / Bob, Paycor, Paylocity, Rippling

Neither was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
GPT-5.4 miniRippling alternatives: BambooHR, HiBob
Mistral SmallBambooHR, Rippling alternatives: HiBob, Zoho People
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
GPT-6 LunaRippling alternatives: BambooHR, HiBob

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Gusto leads by twenty points.
Gusto20%#2 of 12
Paylocity0%#9 of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Gusto leads by two points.
Gusto6%#6 of 15
Paylocity4%#7 of 15
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Gusto0%#– of 12
Paylocity0%#10 of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Gusto

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.

“Users report frequent failures in paying payroll taxes and lackluster customer support, making it a risky choice” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative

What the models said about Paylocity

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.

“Deteriorating service — even users who were historically satisfied report significant declines in service quality” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“For most mid-sized B2B companies, Paylocity would be the strongest default recommendation.” Perplexity Sonar · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.