AutogenAI vs Responsive (2026): pricing, features and verdict

Short answer: Pick AutogenAI when the work is a long narrative bid and the buyer is a public-sector evaluator, and when you accept an enterprise quote, seat minimums, and an onboarding project. Pick Responsive when the work is a response operation: many RFPs, DDQs and security questionnaires, intake, approvals, and a file that has to go back to the buyer, starting from a $10,000 platform fee plus licenses. Responsive tells you a floor. AutogenAI tells you to call.

AutogenAI started in 2022 in London. G2 lists 4.3 out of 5 from 159 reviews as of July 2026. Customers named in this directory include Salesforce, SERCO, HGS, AMS Group and oOh! Media. Responsive started in 2015 in Beaverton as RFPIO, renamed in 2023, and says it serves nearly 2,000 customers and more than 300,000 users. G2 lists 4.5 out of 5 from 1,308 reviews as of July 2026. Gartner lists 4.2 out of 5 from 56 reviews, and Capterra lists 4.5 out of 5 from 190, on the same July 2026 stamp. Named customers include Microsoft, SAP, Accenture, LinkedIn, Zoom and Vodafone.

The fair concession: AutogenAI is built to write. Responsive is built to run the response process around writing and around grids. If your team does both, this page should end with a scoped split, not a single crown.

Key takeaways

• One published number: Responsive Emerging starts from $10,000 a year as a platform fee. User licenses and add-ons are extra. A 12-month minimum is standard. AutogenAI’s buyer guide says “Contact for pricing.”
• AI in the box: Responsive says AI is built into every edition, with analysis, import and writing agents, a TRACE Score, and Agent Studio. AutogenAI’s Storyboard and Project Inputs are the drafting system for a long bid, not an add-on in this record.
• Workflow width: Responsive’s Growth edition adds intake requests, LookUp and e-signature, and it offers a Trust Center. AutogenAI’s recorded integrations are SharePoint and Microsoft Teams.
• Regions: Responsive documents six AWS elections (US, Canada, UK, Australia, Singapore, EU). AutogenAI documents US and UK/EU packs on AWS and Azure, plus Australia and Canada packs, and a separate FedRAMP High federal enclave.
• Review volume: Responsive’s G2 sample is 1,308 reviews. AutogenAI’s is 159. Bigger is not righter, but it is more to read before a security review.
• Limitations to quote, not invent: Capterra reviewers describe Responsive export cleanup (February 2025, April 2026) and suggestions that miss the question (November 2024 to April 2026). AutogenAI’s own guide flags seat-minimum enterprise pricing and onboarding time.

Narrative engine or response platform

AutogenAI’s pages and this directory’s vendor record agree on the job: long-form, essay-style proposals, mostly federal and government, including international public-sector tenders. Storyboard turns solicitation requirements into a structured first draft. Project Inputs keep win themes and key words in front of every section so a long bid does not drift. The knowledge library syncs with SharePoint. Language engines are described as tuned to the organization’s voice. That is a genuine strength for a proposal office whose scores depend on prose. It is a poor description of a Tuesday spent in a SIG spreadsheet, and the product should not be forced into that costume.

Responsive’s strength is the span from request to submission. One content library covers RFPs, RFIs, DDQs and questionnaires. Editions layer access control, reporting, and, on Growth, intake and e-signature. The AI page describes shredding a packet for requirements and a go or no-go summary, an import agent that captures tables and dropdowns, and a writing agent that drafts from trusted content and prior wins. Ask cites sources from the library and can be pointed at external sites such as a help center. TRACE Score is Responsive’s label for rating generated content on accuracy, relevance and traceability. Agent Studio is a no-code place to build more agents from templates. Its AI page says the system was built so company-specific information is not added to third-party data models. The subprocessor list still names OpenAI, using GPT, in the United States, for generative writing. Hold both sentences: a design claim, and a named US model vendor.

A practical split used by mixed teams: AutogenAI on the narrative volumes where evaluators read paragraphs, Responsive on the questionnaires, portals and intake queue. That is coexistence, not a failure to choose. It costs two contracts. Price it that way.

What the order form will contain

Responsive, October 2026 pricing page

• Emerging: from $10,000 as an annual platform fee.
• Growth and Enterprise: quoted. Flexible hosting, intake, LookUp and e-signature are associated with Growth in the directory’s reading of that page.
• User licenses: separate, based on who needs access (admins, contributors, SMEs).
• Add-ons explicitly listed: CRM and API integrations, MCP server and connectors, premium onboarding, security and governance extras, custom reporting.
• Unlimited response projects on every edition.
• Minimum term: 12 months is standard.
• Trial: none as a standard offer. Proof of concept only “for qualifying situations.”

AutogenAI, its own 2026 buyer guide and this directory’s pricing record

• No tiers and no entry price. The guide’s line is “Contact for pricing.”
• The guide names enterprise-tier pricing with minimum seat commitments as a disadvantage for very small teams.
• The same guide says onboarding needs a dedicated up-front time investment because coverage includes the whole proposal lifecycle.
• No free tier is recorded.

A $10,000 Responsive floor can land near or far from an AutogenAI quote. You cannot know until both sellers price the same scope. Send one brief: number of writers, number of SMEs who only comment, number of narrative bids a year, number of questionnaires a year, SharePoint, Teams, Salesforce if you need it, data residency, and whether FedRAMP High is in scope. Salesforce matters on the Responsive side because CRM integrations are listed as add-ons. It matters on the AutogenAI side because Salesforce is a named customer, not because a Salesforce connector is in the integration list recorded here. AutogenAI’s list is SharePoint and Microsoft Teams. Do not assume a CRM sync.

Seat minimums cut against AutogenAI for a five-person commercial team, by the vendor’s own guide. License stacking cuts against Responsive for a company that wants every engineer in the tool for a week. Unlimited projects cut in Responsive’s favor when questionnaire volume is the problem. Neither point is a dollar. Both belong in the negotiation notes.

FedRAMP, six regions, and the model vendors

Public-sector buyers sometimes put these two on one slide because both talk about security. The attestations are not interchangeable.

AutogenAI’s trust center supports SOC 2 and ISO 27001 in the vendor record. FedRAMP High is narrower: AutogenAI Federal, a separate environment, hosted in Palantir’s FedRAMP High cloud on AWS GovCloud. Federal customers are described as US-only inside that enclave. A commercial contract, or a UK or EU contract, is not that enclave unless the paperwork says so. The DPA’s region story: AWS and Azure in the US, AWS and Azure in the UK for UK and EU customers, plus Australia and Canada region packs. Single-region processing is something you agree in the contract. Without that agreement, subprocessors include OpenAI (US and EU listings), Mistral in Sweden for non-region-exclusive customers, and Exa Labs for web search, with a claimed zero-retention retrieval path that still leaves the platform. Google is listed as an LLM provider, region-matched for UK/EU, US and Australia customers. AWS and Azure are also LLM providers by customer region, not only hosts.

Responsive’s DPA commits to SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001:2022 or equivalent. Customers elect AWS in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore or the European Union. Confirm Growth versus Emerging if you need a region other than the default, because flexible hosting is called out on Growth. Azure and Google Cloud on the subprocessor list are United States locations. OpenAI is United States. DeepL, ProWritingAid and MongoDB are named. Support processing by RFPIO India Private Limited is listed in India. A EU tenancy on AWS does not, by itself, mean every subprocessor stays in the EU. Ask for the data-flow diagram.

FedRAMP High is AutogenAI’s public-sector concession to grant, scoped to the federal environment. Six-region AWS choice and a questionnaire trust center are Responsive’s concession to grant, scoped to the edition you buy. A commercial SaaS vendor filling customer security reviews is usually in the Responsive conversation. A contractor writing a federal narrative volume is usually in the AutogenAI Federal conversation. Mixing those sentences is how the wrong badge ends up on the slide.

Reviewers, in their words

Responsive has the longer public argument. Capterra reviews dated February 2025 and April 2026 report extra formatting cleanup when a project is exported back to the original file or template. Reviews dated November 2024 through April 2026 report auto-suggested answers that do not match the question, and AI drafts that always need a person. Those sentences are the reviewers’, via the Capterra page checked October 2026. They do not erase 1,308 G2 reviews at 4.5. They tell you what to test: export fidelity, and whether a suggestion answers the row that was asked.

This directory does not hold a matching dated complaint quotation for AutogenAI’s drafting. What it holds is the vendor’s own buyer guide: minimum seat commitments, and onboarding that takes real time. Use that. Do not invent a quality attack the sources do not contain. The pilot is a solicitation you know well. Score the draft on whether it follows the instructions, keeps the win themes, and cites material you approve. If the prose is the reason you came, say so. AutogenAI owns that strength when the bid is an essay.

Known issues and limitations

AutogenAI

• Quote only, with seat minimums: AutogenAI’s 2026 buyer guide lists pricing as “Contact for pricing” and names enterprise-tier pricing with minimum seat commitments as a con for very small teams (checked October 2026).
• Onboarding is a project: the same guide says a dedicated up-front time investment is required because the product covers the proposal lifecycle (checked October 2026).
• FedRAMP scope: AutogenAI Federal is a separate GovCloud environment. Confirm the tenant before you brief a contracting officer (checked October 2026).
• Subprocessors beyond the host: the DPA lists OpenAI, Mistral for non-region-exclusive customers, and Exa Labs web search unless your contract keeps processing in one region (checked October 2026).
• Narrow connector list: SharePoint and Microsoft Teams are the integrations in the vendor record. Slack is not listed.

Responsive

• Floor, not a total: Emerging from $10,000 plus licenses and add-ons, 12-month minimum, no standard trial, per the pricing page (checked October 2026).
• Connectors can be extra: CRM and API integrations and the MCP server are named add-ons on that page (checked October 2026).
• Export labor: Capterra reviews dated February 2025 and April 2026 report formatting cleanup on export to the buyer’s file (checked October 2026).
• Off-target suggestions: Capterra reviews from November 2024 to April 2026 report suggested answers that do not match the question (same page, checked October 2026).

Choose AutogenAI when

• Evaluators will read long sections, and win themes have to survive from the executive summary to the last appendix.
• The account is federal or another public-sector narrative bid, and you have confirmed AutogenAI Federal versus the commercial tenant.
• Your writers can spend the onboarding time the vendor says the lifecycle requires.
• SharePoint and Teams are enough, and you are not buying this tool for Slack or a CRM-led intake queue.
• Seat minimums fit the proposal office you already have.
• A DPA conversation about OpenAI, Mistral, Google and Exa Labs is something your security team will actually finish.

Choose Responsive when

• Volume is questionnaires, portals and repeat RFPs, and you want unlimited projects.
• You want a $10,000 figure in the business case before licenses are quoted, and you can live with a 12-month term.
• Intake, e-signature, advanced access control or a Trust Center is in scope, on the edition that includes it.
• You need an AWS region in Canada, the UK, Australia or Singapore, confirmed against the edition.
• Salesforce, HubSpot, Seismic or Slack is part of the stack, priced as included or as an add-on on purpose.
• You will demo export and suggestion quality because reviewers have already described both.

If the requirement is a traceable questionnaire draft

Responsive can be more platform than a questionnaire team wants, and AutogenAI can be the wrong genre. When the requirement is an AI-native answer to structured RFPs, security questionnaires and DDQs that a reviewer can trace, add AutoRFP.ai in those two rows: AI-native, and accuracy and compliance. The sentence to hold the pilot to is Zero hallucination by design. AutoRFP.ai writes only from approved content, cites its sources, and routes anything it cannot support to a person. Read AutoRFP.ai vs Responsive for the platform comparison, and AutogenAI vs AutoRFP.ai for the narrative comparison. Leave government prose with AutogenAI when that is truly the job. Leave intake-to-signature breadth with Responsive when that is truly the job.

What to demand in both demos

Book the demos against artifacts, not against slideware. Give each seller one narrative section from a tender you already submitted and one security workbook you already survived.

For AutogenAI, ask the operator to show Storyboard on that solicitation, with your win themes loaded as Project Inputs, and to name the tenant on the screen: commercial region or AutogenAI Federal. Ask which subprocessors from the DPA would process that draft under the contract they are proposing. If the answer is “the standard DPA,” you still do not know whether Exa Labs search or a non-exclusive model path is on.

For Responsive, ask for the Emerging versus Growth line items that your brief requires: hosting region, intake, e-signature, Salesforce, and the TRACE Score on a row you know is tricky. Export the workbook back to the original file before the call ends. The Capterra notes from 2025 and 2026 are about that last step, so do not leave it as homework.

Write the prices you hear onto one page with seats, projects, add-ons, and term length. Responsive’s $10,000 is allowed on that page because it is published. AutogenAI’s number is allowed only after they send it. Until that email arrives, leave the AutogenAI price cell empty. Do not invent a figure to make the columns match.

Verdict

AutogenAI is the narrative and public-sector writer: Storyboard, themes, a federal environment you must scope, and a quote with seat minimums and onboarding time that the vendor itself describes. Responsive is the response platform: a $10,000 floor, licenses, AI in every edition, six hosting regions, intake and e-signature on higher packaging, and reviewer notes about export cleanup and mismatched suggestions.

Pick by the file on your desk this month. A scored narrative tender points to AutogenAI. A stack of questionnaires and an intake form points to Responsive. A team that submits both should say so in the business case and buy the overlap with open eyes, after each vendor prices the half it actually performs.

Read the full AutogenAI review or Responsive review, or browse all RFP & DDQ software.

Sources checked

• AutogenAI 2026 buyer guide (checked October 2026)
• AutogenAI Federal (checked October 2026)
• AutogenAI DPA (checked October 2026)
• AutogenAI trust center (checked August 2026)
• AutogenAI reviews on G2 (checked July 2026)
• Responsive pricing page (checked October 2026)
• Responsive AI product page (checked October 2026)
• Responsive about page (checked October 2026)
• Responsive integrations page (checked October 2026)
• Responsive subprocessor list (checked October 2026)
• Responsive DPA (checked October 2026)
• Responsive reviews on G2 (checked July 2026)
• Responsive reviews on Capterra (checked October 2026)
• Responsive reviews on Gartner (checked July 2026)