Rippling Spend vs Expensify
Two of twelve models named Rippling Spend first on the direct prompt; zero named Expensify. Both were named by all twelve models and Rippling Spend carries 24 labels and Expensify 50, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Named in four categories this edition.
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
Rippling SpendFirst choices, of twelve modelsExpensify
Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Rippling Spend and Expensify were named in the same answer thirty-five times, of the 116 answers naming Rippling Spend and the 213 naming Expensify. In those answers Expensify took the first choice two times and Rippling Spend three.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | | |
Rippling Spend Expensify first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Rippling Spend on the left and Expensify on the right.The direct prompt
Rippling Spend first, Expensify not the choice
2 of 12 modelsExpensify was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
6 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Expensify19%#3 of 7Rippling Spend0%#– of 7Rippling Spend9%#4 of 11Expensify4%#6 of 11Expensify5%#5 of 9Rippling Spend3%#– of 9What the models said about Rippling Spend
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“Rippling Spend – Best if you want one platform that ties HR, payroll, and expense reporting together.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Spendesk, Expensify, SAP Concur, or Rippling Spend are often cited as top recommendations” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“the strongest all-around pick right now is often Rippling Spend” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
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
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.