1. [Home](/) 2. [Comparisons](/comparisons) 3. AutoRFP.ai vs Responsive (2026) ComparisonsOctober 7, 2026 # AutoRFP.ai vs Responsive (2026): pricing, features and verdict AutoRFP.ai: Accuracy-first, AI-native, source-grounded platform for RFPs, security questionnaires, and DDQs. Responsive: Enterprise response management from intake to submission. ## Quick verdict Choose AutoRFP.ai for software and finance teams answering structured RFPs in Word and Excel who want accuracy-first drafts, responses written to win, and a workflow that is easy to run; choose Responsive for enterprise teams with complex approval chains and heavy integration requirements. AutoRFP.ai starts lower, at $899/mo against $10,000 (Emerging edition) for Responsive. In our capability model AutoRFP.ai leads on AI drafting, source attribution and self-serve setup, while Responsive leads on security questionnaires. Both profiles reviewed Jul 2026 2 of 70 profiles, one scoring modelNo paid placement[Sources checked: 13](#source-registry) ## Choose AutoRFP.ai or Responsive ### AU![AutoRFP.ai logo](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=autorfp.ai&sz=128) Choose AutoRFP.ai when - Software and finance teams answering structured RFPs in Word and Excel who want accuracy-first drafts, responses written to win, and a workflow that is easy to run. - You need stronger AI drafting, source attribution and self-serve setup than Responsive offers. - You want the lower entry price: $899/mo. ### RE![Responsive logo](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=responsive.io&sz=128) Choose Responsive when - Enterprise teams with complex approval chains and heavy integration requirements. - You need stronger security questionnaires than AutoRFP.ai offers. ## Side-by-side comparison __Scores run 0 (not offered) to 3 (category-leading). Edge marks who leads the row; Match means the scores are the same. Confirm certifications on the vendor site before a security review.__ | Capability | AutoRFP.ai | Responsive | Edge | | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | | Best for | Software and finance teams answering structured RFPs in Word and Excel who want accuracy-first drafts, responses written to win, and a workflow that is easy to run. | Enterprise teams with complex approval chains and heavy integration requirements. | \- | | Starting price | $899/mo | $10,000 (Emerging edition) | AutoRFP.ai | | Free tier | No | No | Match | | RFPs | 3/3 | 3/3 | Match | | DDQs | 3/3 | 3/3 | Match | | Security questionnaires | 2/3 | 3/3 | Responsive | | AI drafting | 3/3 | 2/3 | AutoRFP.ai | | Answer library | 3/3 | 3/3 | Match | | Source attribution | 3/3 | 2/3 | AutoRFP.ai | | Workflow & approvals | 3/3 | 3/3 | Match | | Integrations | 3/3 | 3/3 | Match | | Self-serve onboarding | 2/3 | 0/3 | AutoRFP.ai | | ISO 27001 | ISO 27001:2022 | ISO 27001:2022 | \- | | SOC 2 | SOC 2 Type II | SOC 2 Type II | \- | | US hosting | Yes (US West, Oregon) | Yes (customer-elected AWS region) | \- | | EU hosting | Yes (EU Central, Frankfurt) | Yes (customer-elected AWS region) | \- | | Slack | Slack | Slack | \- | | Microsoft Teams | Microsoft Teams | Microsoft Teams (Responsive Bot) | \- | | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, GCP | \- | | Listed integrations | Salesforce, HubSpot, Microsoft Dynamics 365, Slack, Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, OneDrive, Google Drive, Confluence, Notion, Drata, Vanta, Okta, Excel, Word, Browser extension, MCP server (Claude, ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot) | Salesforce, HubSpot, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Seismic, SharePoint | \- | | Certifications | ISO 27001:2022, SOC 2 Type II | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001:2022 | \- | ## What they look like ### AU![AutoRFP.ai logo](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=autorfp.ai&sz=128) AutoRFP.ai ![Screenshot of the AutoRFP.ai website](/screenshots/autorfp-ai.webp) ### RE![Responsive logo](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=responsive.io&sz=128) Responsive ![Screenshot of the Responsive website](/screenshots/responsive.webp) ## Security: ISO 27001, SOC 2, and regional hosting Put AutoRFP.ai and Responsive through the same three questions a security reviewer will ask: ISO 27001, SOC 2, and whether you can keep the tenancy in the US or the EU. Cells say **Not listed** when we could not find the claim on a public vendor page. __Confirm certificates and residency on the vendor site or Trust Center before a formal review.AutoRFP.ai: Customers also elect Asia Pacific hosting in Australia East (Sydney). Responsive: AWS hosting can be elected in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore, or the European Union. Azure and Google Cloud entries on the same list are United States only.__ | Check | AutoRFP.ai | Responsive | | ---------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | ISO 27001 | ISO 27001:2022 [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai/trust), 2026-08 | ISO 27001:2022 [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa), 2026-08 | | SOC 2 | SOC 2 Type II [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai/trust), 2026-08 | SOC 2 Type II [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa), 2026-08 | | US hosting | Yes (US West, Oregon) [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai/trust/subprocessors), 2026-08 | Yes (customer-elected AWS region) [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa-sub-processor-list), 2026-08 | | EU hosting | Yes (EU Central, Frankfurt) [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai/trust/subprocessors), 2026-08 | Yes (customer-elected AWS region) [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa-sub-processor-list), 2026-08 | ## Slack and Microsoft Teams During a live questionnaire, SMEs get pinged in Slack or Teams, not in a vendor portal. Here is what AutoRFP.ai and Responsive publish for those two connections. __Native chat apps only. CRM, storage and identity connectors stay in the integrations list.__ | Connection | AutoRFP.ai | Responsive | | --------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Slack | Slack [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai), 2026-08 | Slack [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io), 2026-07 | | Microsoft Teams | Microsoft Teams [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai), 2026-08 | Microsoft Teams (Responsive Bot) [microsoft.com](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365-app-certification/teams/rfpio-responsive-bot), 2026-08 | ## Subprocessors: the big three clouds, then the niche names Compare AutoRFP.ai and Responsive on AWS, Azure and GCP first. Then scan for niche processors a reviewer should pause on: third-party LLMs, session replay, or support that leaves the region you elected. __Cloud row lists the big three only. Niche names sit in the notes when the vendor published them.__ | Layer | AutoRFP.ai | Responsive | | --------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, GCP | | Watch-outs | **Intercom:** Support traffic is listed as United States hosting for US, EU, and Asia Pacific tenants.**Firecrawl:** Feature-specific and excludeable: it only runs when someone uses the crawl feature. | **Microsoft Azure:** Listed location is the United States, even when the AWS tenancy is elected in the EU.**Google Cloud:** Listed location is the United States.**OpenAI:** Third-party model provider. Listed location is the United States.**ProWritingAid:** Answer text in the editor can leave the core host for a writing-assistance vendor.**DeepL:** Listed location is the United States.**RFPIO India Private Limited:** Support processing is listed in India. | **Short answer:** Pick AutoRFP.ai if you want the accuracy-first tool for writing winning responses in a workflow that is easy to run: cited drafts from approved content, unlimited users, and one published price ($899 a month for 24 projects a year) that already covers every user and integration. Pick Responsive if you want a wider platform around the answer (intake requests, e-signature, a Trust Center, six AWS hosting regions, unlimited projects) and can work with a $10,000 platform-fee floor plus user licenses and add-ons. Responsive’s strength is that broader building. AutoRFP.ai’s strength is accuracy, responses written to win, and a day-to-day workflow that stays easy. [Responsive](/responsive) launched as RFPIO in Beaverton, Oregon in 2015, renamed itself in 2023, and says it now serves nearly 2,000 customers and more than 300,000 users with over 500 employees. [AutoRFP.ai](/autorfp-ai) began in 2022 and is a much smaller company, with offices in Vancouver, Brisbane, Stockholm and New York. Customer and headcount figures are each vendor’s own, as of October 2026. That size gap matters less than you might think for drafting, and more than you might think for everything around it. ## Key takeaways - **Entry prices sit within $800 of each other:** AutoRFP.ai Scale is $10,788 a year with unlimited users; Responsive Emerging starts from $10,000 as a platform fee before user licenses and add-ons (both checked October 2026). - **Opposite meters:** AutoRFP.ai caps projects (24 or 50 a year) and never charges per user. Responsive includes unlimited response projects and charges for user licenses across admins, contributors and SMEs. - **Platform breadth:** Responsive’s Growth edition adds intake requests, LookUp and e-signature, and it sells a Trust Center for sharing prefilled questionnaires. AutoRFP.ai stays on drafting, review and export. - **Review depth:** Responsive holds 4.5 out of 5 on G2 from 1,308 reviews; AutoRFP.ai holds 4.8 out of 5 from 60 (as of July 2026). - **Hosting and models:** Responsive offers AWS hosting in six regions and names OpenAI in the US for generative writing. AutoRFP.ai offers three regions and lists Azure AI services in the elected region. - **Limitations:** AutoRFP.ai has project ceilings, a 12-month term after 30 days and no trust center. Responsive layers licenses and add-ons on its floor, and Capterra reviewers report export cleanup and off-target suggestions. ## What each one is actually built to do Responsive calls its category Strategic Response Management, and the product is built to match. One platform takes a sales request through intake, shreds the RFP for a go/no-go call, drafts from the library, routes to experts, collects a signature, and shares security documents through a Trust Center. Its history explains the breadth: RFP360 joined in 2021, InHub (aimed at the investment community) in 2022, and Bidhive in 2025, per its about page. AutoRFP.ai is deliberately narrower. Its pages describe three modules: response generation, content management and collaboration. You import the buyer’s file, it drafts every answer from your approved content, reviewers check the sources and Trust Score, and the answers go back into the original document or portal. There is no intake form, e-signature step or sharing portal. So the first question is not which AI writes better. It is whether you want one system for the whole request-to-signature path, or a sharp tool for the answer-writing middle that plugs into what you already run. ## How the drafts get written and checked Both vendors split AI into named jobs, and both promise you can see where an answer came from. Responsive’s AI page lists agents for each stage. One shreds RFXs, DDQs and long questionnaires into key requirements and a summary. A patented import agent captures tables, dropdowns and subsections. A writing agent drafts “from trusted content and prior successful responses.” The Ask desktop app returns library answers with source citations and can be pointed at external sites such as a help center. A TRACE Score rates each AI answer for accuracy, relevance and traceability, and Agent Studio lets you build your own no-code agents from templates. AutoRFP.ai’s response generation page describes a multi-step pipeline with re-rankers that drafts from approved content and documents. Each answer shows its sources, how old they are, and a Trust Score that separates verbatim library text from adapted or freshly generated wording. Low-confidence questions get flagged rather than guessed. Its collaboration page adds an AI reviewer that checks a response for gaps and inconsistencies before a human opens it. On paper these are close cousins: a confidence score, citations, and a review pass. Responsive gives you more agents and a builder for your own; AutoRFP.ai gives you fewer moving parts. Neither vendor publishes an independent accuracy benchmark, so skip the homepage percentages and run one of your own past questionnaires through each. Responsive’s own reviewers give a useful warning. Capterra reviews from November 2024 to April 2026 describe auto-suggested answers that miss the question, and one from March 2026 says generated answers always need review. That is true of every tool in this category; it is just better documented for the one with 190 Capterra reviews. ## Security questionnaires, DDQs and the trust layer For a SaaS or fintech team, security reviews are often the highest-volume questionnaire. Here the two take different positions. Responsive covers more of the workflow around the questionnaire. Its pricing page sells a Trust Center that creates prefilled questionnaires and documents you can share securely with customers and prospects. Its integrations page lists Whistic for vendor assessments and Door for DDQs. If your goal is to deflect some questionnaires before they are sent, that trust layer is a real advantage. AutoRFP.ai concentrates on finishing the questionnaire you were sent. Its security questionnaire page says the browser extension works inside OneTrust, UpGuard and Drata portals, and the content management page says exports keep Excel macros, dropdown validations and conditional formatting. On the DDQ side, it reads multi-tab ILPA workbooks with merged cells and writes answers back in place, and nothing goes to the investor until a named reviewer signs off. It pulls compliance context from Vanta and Drata over MCP, but it does not host a trust center, so document sharing stays in another tool. Which matters more depends on your queue. If prospects would accept a trust portal link, Responsive can remove work. If they insist on their own workbook or portal, AutoRFP.ai’s file handling is the stronger fit. ## Pricing and total cost Here is what each vendor publishes, as of October 2026. **AutoRFP.ai:** Scale at $899 a month paid yearly for 24 projects, Accelerate at $1,299 a month for 50, and a custom Enterprise tier whose per-project price drops as volume rises. A project is any RFP, DDQ, tender or security questionnaire, whatever the size, including its clarifications. Every plan includes unlimited users, SSO, 18+ integrations, translation, implementation and support, and the pricing page says there are no paid add-ons. A 30-day money-back guarantee comes first, then a minimum 12-month term. **Responsive:** three components. An annual platform fee, with the Emerging edition “Starting from $10,000” and Growth and Enterprise quoted. User licenses, “based on who needs access” across admins, contributors and SMEs. Add-ons and services, with examples including the MCP server, CRM and API integrations, security, governance and custom reporting, and premium onboarding. Every edition includes unlimited response projects. The FAQ calls a 12-month minimum standard, offers a proof of concept only “for qualifying situations,” and mentions a Lite Edition for small businesses. How that plays out: - **Many contributors, moderate volume:** AutoRFP.ai’s flat price is the easier budget, because the twentieth SME costs the same as the first. - **High volume, small team:** Responsive’s unlimited projects start to look better once you pass 50 bids a year, because AutoRFP.ai’s next step is a custom Enterprise quote. - **CRM-driven workflows:** check whether Responsive’s CRM integration is in your edition or an add-on; AutoRFP.ai includes Salesforce on every plan. - **Small business:** ask Responsive about Lite, which is mentioned in the FAQ but not priced on the page. The honest summary: AutoRFP.ai’s sticker is the whole bill unless you outgrow 50 projects. Responsive’s $10,000 is a floor, and the licenses decide the total. ## Hosting, models and the admin load Hosting is where Responsive is clearly broader. Its subprocessor list lets customers elect AWS hosting in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore or the European Union, and its DPA commits to SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001:2022 or an equivalent. Note that the pricing page puts “flexible hosting options” in the Growth edition, so confirm the region your edition includes. AutoRFP.ai offers US (Oregon), EU (Frankfurt) and Australia (Sydney), holds ISO 27001:2022 and SOC 2 Type II per its trust center, and lists no Canadian, UK or Singapore option. On models, the lists read differently. Responsive names OpenAI’s GPT for generative writing, with a United States location. AutoRFP.ai lists Azure AI services in the customer-elected region and states that customer data is not used to train models. For a European bank’s privacy team, that difference is worth a line in the security review. The admin load also differs. Responsive’s pricing FAQ says implementation depends on scope, integrations and content migration, and that larger rollouts may need advanced configuration; premium onboarding is an add-on. AutoRFP.ai includes implementation and says accounts are configured within 48 hours of a demo. More platform means more to configure, which is neither good nor bad, just a staffing question. ## Where the SMEs actually do the work The first week is a vendor promise on both sides. Read it as a test plan, not a calendar. AutoRFP.ai’s collaboration page says that after a 30-minute demo the account can be configured within 48 hours, with onboarding covering team structure, permissions and workflows, and that most teams are on their first RFP within the first week. The pricing page makes the input concrete: send as few as two previous responses, in Word, Excel or PDF, and they are imported within 48 hours. After that, the collaboration page describes a dashboard of each person’s workload and completion, assignment of single questions to security, legal, finance, technical and compliance reviewers, comments that stay on the requirement, and an audit trail of who supplied an answer, who edited it and who approved it. Assignments, mentions and reminders go to Slack, Microsoft Teams or email, and a cited library answer can be pulled into a Slack or Teams chat. Unlimited users is what keeps that reviewer list off the invoice. Responsive does not publish a day count. Premium deployment and support are listed on the Growth edition, not inside the Emerging platform fee. What it does publish is where the work sits once you are live: intake requests on Growth, an Ask desktop app that returns library answers with citations, and Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook add-ins that surface AI-recommended content inside those apps. The homepage’s named users match a proposal operation. Dawn Garrison is Director of Proposal Management at Lighthouse, Nick DeMarco is Sr. RFP Content Writer at Payscale, and Andrew Mersman is Senior Director of Solution Consulting at Netsmart. The paperwork behind the draft splits the same way. AutoRFP.ai’s subprocessor list puts Azure AI Services, AWS backend hosting and Google Cloud Firestore in the region the customer elects (Oregon, Frankfurt or Sydney), and states that it does not use any customer or PII data to train LLMs. Its trust center also lists GDPR, UK GDPR, CCPA and EU Cloud CoC beside ISO 27001:2022 and SOC 2 Type II, and says it is reviewed and trusted in 44 or more countries. Responsive’s subprocessor list names OpenAI, using GPT, in the United States for generative writing, and lets customers elect AWS hosting in six regions, with flexible hosting called out from Growth upward. So one vendor is selling a configured account, a questionnaire your occasional experts can touch from Slack, and three hosting regions. The other is selling a platform whose clock depends on what you turn on, Office add-ins for people who live in those apps, and a residency menu that covers Canada, the UK and Singapore. Both are coherent. They are not the same purchase. ## Known issues and limitations ### AutoRFP.ai - **Project ceilings:** 24 projects a year on Scale and 50 on Accelerate, then a custom Enterprise quote, per its [pricing page](https://autorfp.ai/pricing) (checked October 2026). - **Annual lock-in after 30 days:** contracts run at least 12 months once the first 30 days pass, and the refund requires real usage (3 imports, 2 invited users, 1 project, 5 approvals, 1 export), per the same [pricing page](https://autorfp.ai/pricing) (checked October 2026). - **Narrower platform:** no intake requests, e-signature or trust center; compliance context comes from Vanta and Drata connections listed on its [integrations page](https://autorfp.ai/integrations) (checked October 2026). - **Fewer regions and reviews:** three hosting regions per its [trust center](https://autorfp.ai/trust) (checked October 2026), and 60 [G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/autorfp-ai/reviews) as of July 2026 against Responsive’s 1,308. ### Responsive - **Layered pricing:** a platform fee from $10,000, plus user licenses and add-ons, with a 12-month minimum as standard and a proof of concept only for qualifying buyers, per its [pricing page](https://www.responsive.io/pricing) (checked October 2026). - **Paid connectors:** CRM and API integrations and the MCP server are listed among add-ons on the same [pricing page](https://www.responsive.io/pricing) (checked October 2026). - **Export cleanup:** [Capterra reviewers](https://www.capterra.com/p/148054/Responsive/reviews/) in February 2025 and April 2026 report extra hours fixing formatting when exporting to the buyer’s template (checked October 2026). - **Suggestion quality:** reviewers on the same [Capterra page](https://www.capterra.com/p/148054/Responsive/reviews/) from November 2024 to April 2026 describe suggested answers that miss the question (checked October 2026). ## Choose AutoRFP.ai when - You are a SaaS, FinTech, HealthTech or financial-services team, and your queue is mostly structured RFPs, DDQs and security questionnaires in Excel, Word or portals. - You want the full price on the page, with every SME, integration and SSO included. - You bid up to 50 times a year and expect your contributor list to keep growing. - Your buyers demand answers in their own workbook (ILPA DDQs, macro-heavy Excel) or portal (OneTrust, UpGuard). - You would rather the tool file approved answers than assign someone to curate a library. - You are leaving Responsive and want to carry the library export across with its tags. ## Choose Responsive when - You want intake requests, e-signature, LookUp and a Trust Center under one contract. - Buyers require data residency in Canada, the UK or Singapore. - Your bid volume is high, and unlimited projects matter more than unlimited users. - You want to build custom no-code agents, or bring approved answers into ChatGPT and Microsoft Office apps. - You have an administrator with time to configure a large platform, and budget for onboarding services. - A 2,000-customer vendor with 1,308 G2 reviews is a procurement requirement in itself. ## Verdict Different scope, overlapping core. Both draft RFP, DDQ and security answers from approved content with a confidence score attached, and both have reviewers who would like cleaner exports and sharper suggestions. Responsive is the bigger building: more agents, more regions, more modules, more lines on the invoice. AutoRFP.ai is the accuracy-first tool: winning responses from approved content, a workflow that is easy to run, published flat pricing, unlimited users, and strong write-back into the buyer’s file. Project caps and a shorter public track record are the limits you accept with that focus. Inside its lane (software and financial-services teams answering structured questionnaires), AutoRFP.ai wins on accuracy you can check, responses written to win, and a workflow that is easy to run, with a price you can read before the call. If your problem is the whole request-to-signature pipeline across regions, Responsive is the stronger pick. Or as a colleague might say: Responsive if you need a platform, AutoRFP.ai if you need the answers. Read the full [AutoRFP.ai review](/autorfp-ai) or [Responsive review](/responsive), or browse [all RFP & DDQ software](/). ## Sources checked - [AutoRFP.ai pricing page](https://autorfp.ai/pricing) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai response generation page](https://autorfp.ai/features/response-generation) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai content management page](https://autorfp.ai/features/content-management) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai collaboration page](https://autorfp.ai/features/collaboration) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai integrations page](https://autorfp.ai/integrations) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai security questionnaire page](https://autorfp.ai/security-questionnaire-automation) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai trust center](https://autorfp.ai/trust) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai subprocessors](https://autorfp.ai/trust/subprocessors) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai Responsive alternative page (migration tool)](https://autorfp.ai/alternatives/responsive) (checked October 2026) - [AutoRFP.ai reviews on G2](https://www.g2.com/products/autorfp-ai/reviews) (checked July 2026) - [Responsive pricing page](https://www.responsive.io/pricing) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive AI product page](https://www.responsive.io/product/ai) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive about page](https://www.responsive.io/about) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive integrations page](https://www.responsive.io/integrations) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive subprocessor list](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa-sub-processor-list) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive data processing addendum](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive reviews on Capterra](https://www.capterra.com/p/148054/Responsive/reviews/) (checked October 2026) - [Responsive reviews on G2](https://www.g2.com/products/responsive-formerly-rfpio/reviews) (checked July 2026) ## Frequently asked questions What is the difference between AutoRFP.ai and Responsive? Responsive (formerly RFPIO, founded 2015) is a broad response platform with AI agents, intake requests, e-signature, a Trust Center and hosting in six AWS regions. AutoRFP.ai (started 2022) is narrower: it drafts RFP, DDQ and security questionnaire answers from your content with a Trust Score and sources on each, files approved answers back automatically, and writes them into the buyer's original file. Which is cheaper, AutoRFP.ai or Responsive? Their entry points look close but cover different things. AutoRFP.ai's Scale plan is $899 a month paid yearly ($10,788) for 24 projects with unlimited users and no paid add-ons. Responsive's Emerging edition starts from $10,000 as a platform fee, with user licenses and add-ons priced on top and unlimited projects (both checked October 2026). Which is better for security questionnaires and DDQs? Responsive covers more of the security workflow around the answer: a Trust Center for sharing prefilled questionnaires, a Whistic integration and a Door integration for DDQs. AutoRFP.ai focuses on the answer itself, with cited drafts, write-back into multi-tab Excel and ILPA workbooks, and a browser extension for OneTrust, UpGuard and SAP Ariba, but no trust center of its own. Where is data hosted, and which AI models are used? Responsive customers can elect AWS hosting in the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Singapore or the EU, and its subprocessor list names OpenAI in the United States for generative writing. AutoRFP.ai offers US (Oregon), EU (Frankfurt) or Australia (Sydney), and lists Azure AI services in the customer-elected region. Can I trial either tool or switch from Responsive? Responsive offers a proof of concept only for qualifying situations and treats a 12-month minimum term as standard. AutoRFP.ai offers a 30-day money-back guarantee, then a 12-month minimum, and advertises a native tool that imports a Responsive library export with tags and metadata. Should I choose AutoRFP.ai or Responsive? Choose AutoRFP.ai if you are a SaaS, FinTech, HealthTech or financial-services team that mainly needs accurate, cited answers to structured RFPs, DDQs and security questionnaires at a published flat price. Choose Responsive if you want intake, e-signature, a trust center, more hosting regions and unlimited projects in one platform, and you have an admin to run it. Do AutoRFP.ai and Responsive list ISO 27001, SOC 2, and US or EU hosting? AutoRFP.ai: ISO 27001 ISO 27001:2022, SOC 2 SOC 2 Type II, US Yes (US West, Oregon), EU Yes (EU Central, Frankfurt), Slack Slack, Teams Microsoft Teams, clouds AWS, Azure, GCP. Responsive: ISO 27001 ISO 27001:2022, SOC 2 SOC 2 Type II, US Yes (customer-elected AWS region), EU Yes (customer-elected AWS region), Slack Slack, Teams Microsoft Teams (Responsive Bot), clouds AWS, Azure, GCP. Confirm both on the vendor sites. ## Source registry Every page we read for these profiles, with the month it was last checked. Anything without a source is shown as not publicly disclosed. Spot an outdated fact? Send it from the [corrections page](/corrections). ### [AutoRFP.ai](/autorfp-ai) Pricing - No pricing source URL recorded. Treat pricing as not publicly disclosed until the vendor confirms it. Security and compliance - [autorfp.ai/trust](https://autorfp.ai/trust)Checked Aug 2026 · ISO 27001 · SOC 2 - [autorfp.ai/trust/subprocessors](https://autorfp.ai/trust/subprocessors)Checked Aug 2026 · US hosting · EU hosting · Hosting · Subprocessors Product and integrations - [autorfp.ai](https://autorfp.ai)Checked Aug 2026 · Slack · Microsoft Teams Third-party reviews - [g2.com/products/autorfp-ai/reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/autorfp-ai/reviews)Checked Jul 2026 · G2 rating - [gartner.com/reviews/product/autorfp-ai](https://www.gartner.com/reviews/product/autorfp-ai)Checked Jul 2026 · Gartner rating ### [Responsive](/responsive) Pricing - [responsive.io/pricing](https://www.responsive.io/pricing)Checked Oct 2026 · Limitation Security and compliance - [responsive.io/legal/dpa](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa)Checked Aug 2026 · ISO 27001 · SOC 2 - [responsive.io/legal/dpa-sub-processor-list](https://www.responsive.io/legal/dpa-sub-processor-list)Checked Aug 2026 · US hosting · EU hosting · Hosting · Subprocessors Product and integrations - [responsive.io](https://www.responsive.io)Checked Jul 2026 · Slack - [learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365-app-certification/teams…](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365-app-certification/teams/rfpio-responsive-bot)Checked Aug 2026 · Microsoft Teams Third-party reviews - [g2.com/products/responsive-formerly-rfpio/reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/responsive-formerly-rfpio/reviews)Checked Jul 2026 · G2 rating - [gartner.com/reviews/product/responsive](https://www.gartner.com/reviews/product/responsive)Checked Jul 2026 · Gartner rating - [capterra.com/p/148054/Responsive/reviews](https://www.capterra.com/p/148054/Responsive/reviews/)Checked Oct 2026 · Capterra rating · Reviewer-reported limitation Table of Contents - [Choose AutoRFP.ai or Responsive](#choose-autorfpai-or-responsive) - [Side-by-side comparison](#side-by-side-comparison) - [What they look like](#what-they-look-like) - [Security: ISO 27001, SOC 2, and regional hosting](#security-iso-27001-soc-2-and-regional-hosting) - [Slack and Microsoft Teams](#slack-and-microsoft-teams) - [Subprocessors: the big three clouds, then the niche names](#subprocessors-the-big-three-clouds-then-the-niche-names) - [Key takeaways](#key-takeaways) - [What each one is actually built to do](#what-each-one-is-actually-built-to-do) - [How the drafts get written and checked](#how-the-drafts-get-written-and-checked) - [Security questionnaires, DDQs and the trust layer](#security-questionnaires-ddqs-and-the-trust-layer) - [Pricing and total cost](#pricing-and-total-cost) - [Hosting, models and the admin load](#hosting-models-and-the-admin-load) - [Where the SMEs actually do the work](#where-the-smes-actually-do-the-work) - [Known issues and limitations](#known-issues-and-limitations) - [Choose AutoRFP.ai when](#choose-autorfpai-when) - [Choose Responsive when](#choose-responsive-when) - [Verdict](#verdict) - [Sources checked](#sources-checked) - [Frequently asked questions](#frequently-asked-questions) - [Source registry](#source-registry) [Summarize with ChatGPT](https://chatgpt.com/?q=Summarize%20this%20article%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Frfp-software-tools.com%2Fcomparisons%2Fautorfp-ai-vs-responsive-2026)[Summarize with Claude](https://claude.ai/new?q=Summarize%20this%20article%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Frfp-software-tools.com%2Fcomparisons%2Fautorfp-ai-vs-responsive-2026)[Summarize with Perplexity](https://www.perplexity.ai/?q=Summarize%20this%20article%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Frfp-software-tools.com%2Fcomparisons%2Fautorfp-ai-vs-responsive-2026) Share this article ## Related articles [**AutoRFP.ai vs Loopio (2026)**A side-by-side look at AutoRFP.ai and Loopio: pricing, capabilities, and who each is best for.RFP Software Tools · October 7, 2026](/comparisons/autorfp-ai-vs-loopio-2026)[**AutoRFP.ai vs Inventive AI (2026)**A side-by-side look at AutoRFP.ai and Inventive AI: pricing, capabilities, and who each is best for.RFP Software Tools · October 7, 2026](/comparisons/autorfp-ai-vs-inventive-ai-2026)[**AutoRFP.ai vs Ombud (2026)**A side-by-side look at AutoRFP.ai and Ombud: pricing, capabilities, and who each is best for.RFP Software Tools · August 13, 2026](/comparisons/autorfp-ai-vs-ombud-2026)[**Arphie vs AutoRFP.ai (2026)**A side-by-side look at Arphie and AutoRFP.ai: pricing, capabilities, and who each is best for.RFP Software Tools · October 8, 2026](/comparisons/arphie-vs-autorfp-ai-2026)