Finance AI Index
Index Spend and procurement Expense management › Ramp vs Expensify
Expense management · September 2026 Edition

Ramp vs Expensify

Seven of twelve models named Ramp first on the direct prompt; zero named Expensify. Both were named by all twelve models and Ramp carries 52 labels and Expensify 50, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Ramp

endorsed leader

Named in seventeen categories this edition.

Expensify

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share34%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate6%16%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#6A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels5250A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Ramp reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Navan was named alongside these two in ten of the twelve direct answers. Ramp vs Zoho Expense · Ramp vs Spendesk · Ramp vs Rippling Spend

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve 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 expense management page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
RampFirst choices, of twelve modelsExpensify
Direct70
Paraphrase62
Comparative50
Budget-constrained201 against Expensify
Scale-constrained10
Negative203 against Ramp · 7 against Expensify
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Ramp and Expensify were named in the same answer 170 times, of the 944 answers naming Ramp and the 213 naming Expensify. In those answers Expensify took the first choice eleven times and Ramp sixty-nine.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Ramp and Expensify stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
Ramp Expensify first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Ramp on the left and Expensify on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Ramp first, Expensify an alternative

7 of 12 modelsExpensify was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashRamp alternatives: Airbase, Brex, Navan, Rippling Spend
Perplexity SonarRamp alternatives: Airbase, Expensify, Navan, SAP Concur, Spendesk
Grok 4.1 FastRamp alternatives: Navan, SAP Concur
DeepSeek V4 FlashRamp alternatives: Airwallex, Brex, Navan, SAP Concur
Qwen 3.7 FlashRamp alternatives: Navan, SAP Concur, Spendesk
Kimi K2Navan, Ramp alternatives: Expensify, Rippling Spend
GLM 4.7 FlashXRamp alternatives: Expensify, Navan, Paylocity, SAP Concur

Neither was the first choice, one was named

2 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Navan alternatives: Ramp, SAP Concur
Mistral SmallSpendesk alternatives: Emburse, Procurify, Ramp

Neither was named

3 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniRippling Spend alternatives: Navan, SAP Concur
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
MiniMax M2.5Rippling Spend alternatives: Airbase, Emburse, Navan, SAP Concur

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
Ramp leads by four points.
Ramp23%#2 of 7
Expensify19%#3 of 7
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Ramp leads by thirty points.
Ramp34%#1 of 11
Expensify4%#6 of 11
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Ramp leads by five points.
Ramp11%#2 of 9
Expensify5%#5 of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Ramp

No label in this category carried a quote.

What the models said about Expensify

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

“A mixed picture — it rates well overall (4.5/5 on G2), but has had a notable drop in sentiment since the "New Expensify" redesign” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Expensify has recently faced criticism for a radical political email sent to users, which many viewed as a privacy violation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · soft negative
“Expensify is a very common tool, but it has faced scrutiny regarding pricing changes, data privacy, and financial stability.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend starting with Expensify if you want the most established and widely-used tool” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Spendesk, Expensify, SAP Concur, or Rippling Spend are often cited as top recommendations” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Best if you value a simple, mobile‑first employee experience and want strong receipt automation at an affordable price.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · alternative
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.