Executive Summary
Everyone is arguing about whether AI makes building cheaper than buying. This report shows what teams actually pay for software, and what the few who built their own say it cost them. It covers 404 data points collected from October 17, 2026 to October 31, 2026.
For Finance Leaders
No verified price increases logged yet this month. Adobe leads the Software Hate Index at 21%. How to cut software costs · Run a Spend Audit.
Key Findings
- What teams pay. Buyers shared 176 yearly bills across 67 tools; ServiceTitan has the highest median, about $120,000 a year (n=3).
- "Build part of it" is the most common verdict. Our editors rate 62 categories: 15 "Build it", 35 "Build part of it", 12 "Keep paying". Most teams keep the core system and replace the costly slice of seats or features around it.
- Most builds state no saving. 23 of 26 documented builds state no saving at all. Treat the savings that are claimed as early and self-reported.
- Alternatives exist at scale. 268 AI-native alternatives and custom builders are listed against 205 incumbent tools.
- Building is a mainstream option. 32% of respondents at organizations using AI say they skipped buying at least one software product or feature to build it with AI coding tools (McKinsey Global Survey on the State of AI, 2026, n = 1,719).
A Note on This First Report
We launched HissingKitty in October 2026. We expected teams to replace bloated software slowly, over several years. Instead, within two weeks, buyers shared hundreds of bills, reviews and builds. We did not see that coming.
This is our first report. It was a lot of work, and it is a passion project. The people behind it spent 20 years building, selling and growing enterprise software companies. We are not hobbyists guessing at how software is bought; we have sat on the vendor side of these renewals.
We believe this is the biggest shift in business software we will see in our careers. That is our view, not a finding.
Why This Research Matters
For two decades, renewing software was the default. The cost of building software has fallen sharply since 2024, which changes the math at every renewal. Finance and operations leaders need independent evidence of what peers pay, where dissatisfaction concentrates, and when replacing a tool is justified.
Methodology at a Glance
- Data Points
- 404: 40 reviews, 162 public data points, 176 anonymous yearly bills, 26 documented builds
- Window
- October 17, 2026 to October 31, 2026
- Coverage
- 67 tools with shared bills; 268 alternatives listed (listings that did not meet our rules, such as hosting companies, were removed during review, while new listings added more tools covered)
- Independence
- Reviews moderated before publication; no vendor pays to appear or rank. Full methodology
01
Headline Number#
$6,836,836 in yearly bills shared across 67 tools. The sum of 176 anonymous yearly bills shared in October 2026. It is neither market spend nor verified savings.
The short version of October 2026: 268 new alternatives and builders were listed against 205 tools, led by HubSpot and Salesforce, tied with 17 each. The largest shared bill was NetSuite at about $2,000,000 a year (one bill). The grid below places each tool with enough bills on both measures at once.
The Replacement Grid, October 2026
HubSpot and Salesforce Drew the Most New Alternatives
- 1
ServiceTitan - 2
HubSpot - 3
Salesforce - 4
Adobe - 5
ZoomInfo - 6
Microsoft Teams - 7
AWS - 8
Klaviyo - 9
Webflow - 10
Intercom
Top 10 Tools Under Pressure, October 2026
| # | Tool | Yearly bill | New altsNew alternatives | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ServiceTitan | $120,000 (n=3) | 6 | 68 |
| 2 | HubSpot | $42,800 (n=7) | 17 | 68 |
| 3 | Salesforce | $40,000 (n=5) | 17 | 67 |
| 4 | Adobe | $840 (n=9) | 13 | 39 |
| 5 | ZoomInfo | $33,500 (n=6) | 6 | 32 |
| 6 | Microsoft Teams | $5,300 (n=6) | 10 | 32 |
| 7 | AWS | $6,500 (n=7) | 8 | 26 |
| 8 | Klaviyo | $36,000 (n=3) | 1 | 18 |
| 9 | Webflow | $550 (n=8) | 6 | 18 |
| 10 | Intercom | $10,248 (n=3) | 4 | 16 |
Only tools with at least 3 shared yearly bills are ranked, so one large bill can't lead. Score out of 100: half from the tool's shared yearly bill compared with the month's largest, half from its new alternatives compared with the month's most. A ranking of pressure, not of product quality.
02
Key Findings#
- Buyers shared 176 yearly bills across 67 tools in October 2026, totaling $6,836,836.
- NetSuite has the largest shared yearly bill this month, about $2,000,000.
- LinkedIn is next, at about $262,854 a year (median of 2).
- HubSpot and Salesforce tied for the most new alternatives this month, 17 new listings each, out of 268 listings in total.
- Figma and HubSpot tied as the most reviewed tools, with 11 reviews and data points each.
- 26 documented builds this month, reporting about $13,300 a month in combined savings.
- No verified price increases were logged October 17, 2026 to October 31, 2026.
- Outside source: 32% of respondents at organizations using AI said they decided against buying at least one software product or feature to build it with AI coding tools instead (McKinsey Global Survey on the State of AI, 2026, 1,719 respondents).
No verified replacement reports yet, so realized build payback cannot be measured this month.
03
What Changed#
This first monthly edition sets the baseline, so there is no earlier month to compare.
What This Means
Every number in this edition becomes the baseline for the next. From the next edition on, this section compares the same measures month over month, so readers can see whether alternatives, bills and price increases are rising or falling.
04
What Buyers Paid#
ServiceTitan Has the Highest Median Yearly Bill, $120,000
The single largest bill, about $2,000,000 for NetSuite (one bill), is 29% of the month's $6,836,836 total, so the total says more about who shared than about typical spend.
Show all 67 tools and bills
| Tool | Bills | Yearly Bill |
|---|---|---|
| NetSuite | 1 | About $2,000,000 |
| 2 | Median $262,854 | |
| ServiceTitan | 3 | Median $120,000 |
| WorkOS | 1 | About $103,000 |
| Trimble | 1 | About $60,000 |
| Drata | 1 | About $47,600 |
| GitHub | 1 | About $47,184 |
| Jobber | 2 | Median $45,174 |
| HubSpot | 7 | Median $42,800 |
| Salesforce | 5 | Median $40,000 |
| Autodesk | 1 | About $40,000 |
| Dialpad | 1 | About $38,700 |
| Klaviyo | 3 | Median $36,000 |
| ZoomInfo | 6 | Median $33,500 |
| Retool | 1 | About $25,000 |
| Vanta | 2 | Median $18,442 |
| Zendesk | 1 | About $13,416 |
| Intercom | 3 | Median $10,248 |
| ClickUp | 3 | Median $9,400 |
| ScrapingBee | 1 | About $7,200 |
| AWS | 7 | Median $6,500 |
| Microsoft Teams | 6 | Median $5,300 |
| Mailchimp | 4 | Median $4,800 |
| Asana | 1 | About $4,800 |
| Riverside | 1 | About $4,800 |
| Shopify | 6 | Median $4,650 |
| Chargify | 1 | About $4,400 |
| Apollo | 2 | Median $3,060 |
| Slack | 4 | Median $2,974 |
| Hootsuite | 1 | About $2,388 |
| Atlassian | 5 | Median $2,300 |
| Zapier | 2 | Median $2,158 |
| Kajabi | 1 | About $2,148 |
| Beehiiv | 8 | Median $2,028 |
| Ahrefs | 2 | Median $1,968 |
| Loom | 3 | Median $1,800 |
| QuickBooks | 7 | Median $1,680 |
| Semrush | 1 | About $1,679 |
| Typeform | 3 | Median $1,548 |
| monday.com | 3 | Median $1,500 |
| DocuSign | 3 | Median $1,440 |
| Figma | 2 | Median $1,346 |
| Jotform | 2 | Median $1,008 |
| Adobe | 9 | Median $840 |
| Bitrix24 | 1 | About $828 |
| Linear | 1 | About $750 |
| Clio | 1 | About $720 |
| Webflow | 8 | Median $550 |
| Supabase | 2 | Median $510 |
| Squarespace | 3 | Median $480 |
| Airtable | 1 | About $432 |
| Wix | 1 | About $380 |
| Descript | 1 | About $348 |
| HeyGen | 2 | Median $348 |
| Xero | 1 | About $324 |
| Cursor | 2 | Median $300 |
| ClickFunnels | 1 | About $300 |
| Notion | 5 | Median $288 |
| Calendly | 3 | Median $240 |
| Vercel | 3 | Median $240 |
| PandaDoc | 1 | About $223 |
| Harvest | 1 | About $200 |
| Canva | 2 | Median $192 |
| OpusClip | 1 | About $180 |
| Evernote | 3 | Median $170 |
| Todoist | 1 | About $120 |
| Macrofactor | 1 | About $100 |
What This Means
NetSuite sits at the top of the sample at about $2,000,000 a year, followed by LinkedIn at $262,854. 38 tools have more than one bill, so their figures are medians: LinkedIn (2), ServiceTitan (3), Jobber (2), HubSpot (7).
Editor's view: a large bill is where the question of building starts, not where it ends. The tools at the top of this list tend to be systems of record (CRM, data, compliance), where switching costs, integrations and audit needs matter as much as the license. Compare your own bill against these figures on each tool's page before deciding.
The Software Hate Index, End of October
The board as it stood on October 31. This snapshot no longer changes. This is the first edition, so it sets the baseline.
- 1
Adobe21% of the hate - 2
Microsoft13% of the hate - 3
Webflow11% of the hate - 4
Salesforce10% of the hate - 5
QuickBooks8% of the hate - 6
Shopify8% of the hate - 7
HubSpot8% of the hate - 8
Atlassian7% of the hate - 9
Figma7% of the hate - 10
AWS7% of the hate
05
What's Replacing Them#
231 AI-native alternatives and 37 builders listed in October 2026, grouped by the tool they replace. Votes are from visitors, one per person an hour.
Show 4 more
Most Reviewed This Month
| Tool | Reviews and posts | Average |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | 11 | 4.0 |
| HubSpot | 11 | 3.0 |
| Intercom | 9 | 3.0 |
| Adobe | 9 | 1.6 |
| Salesforce | 9 | 1.5 |
Show all 12
n = 40 approved reviews plus 162 approved public posts in October 2026. Star averages come from written reviews only; public posts link to their source. HissingKitty Research.
What This Means
HubSpot and Salesforce tied for the most new alternatives this month (17 each). More listings mean more builders see room to compete on price or fit; they do not yet show that buyers are switching.
Votes are the early buyer signal. A listing with net positive votes has been checked by visitors who pay for the tool it replaces. Ties and low vote counts are common this early, so treat the order within a tool as provisional.
Monthly Badges
The top-voted listing for each tool earns "Most Voted Alternative" for the month, once it has at least 3 net votes.
06
What Teams Built Instead#
- public build posts
- public build posts
- tools replaced
- tools replaced
- stated savings, from 3 posts
- stated savings, from 3 posts
- median build time, from 3 posts
- median build time, from 3 posts
HubSpot Is the Tool Teams Built Away From Most
See all 26 posts⌄
These are builders' own claims from public posts, not verified replacement reports. Staff time freed is not necessarily a cash reduction.
What This Means
26 teams documented building their own tool this month; 23 of them state no saving at all, and the rest claim about $13,300 a month combined. These are the builders' own numbers, often shared the week the tool went live, before upkeep costs show up.
Editor's view: most builds replace a workflow or a reporting layer, not the system of record underneath it. That is why "Build part of it" is the most common verdict on our category pages.
What a Claimed Saving Leaves Out
- Support: who fixes it when it breaks, including nights and weekends.
- Maintenance: updates, security patches and staff hours every month.
- Compliance: audits, certifications and data handling rules.
- Migration risk: data export, downtime and retraining staff.
- Usage: many teams use a small share of a tool's features, so the fair comparison is the cost of that share, not the whole license.
07
The Wider Market#
32% of respondents at organizations using AI say they skipped buying at least one software product or feature to build it with AI coding tools instead. That figure comes from an outside survey of 1,719 people, fielded May 4 to June 8, 2026. It is not HissingKitty data and is not counted in any of our numbers.
About a Third of Organizations Chose to Build Instead of Buy
Share of respondents, by industry
- Technology41%n=199
- Healthcare payers and providers39%n=47
- Professional services38%n=205
- Energy and materials38%n=153
- Financial institutions36%n=148
- Media and telecom34%n=71
- Pharma and medical products33%n=55
- Travel and logistics31%n=56
- Consumer goods and retail29%n=116
- Engineering and construction28%n=72
- Advanced manufacturing27%n=95
- Insurance19%n=40
- Public and social sector17%n=71
- All industries32%
What This Means
Technology, healthcare and professional services lead, at 38% to 41%. Insurance and the public sector trail, under 20%, where rules and audits make owning software harder. Even in the lowest group, about one in six respondents say they have made this choice.
Editor's view: the survey asks whether teams skipped a purchase, not whether they cancelled a contract. Most of these builds are likely extra features or small tools, which matches what we see in the builds logged above. Read it as the "Build part of it" path going mainstream.
08
Price Increases Logged#
No verified price increases were logged October 17, 2026 to October 31, 2026. A change counts only when a buyer or vendor states both the old and new price for the window.
09
Notable Stories#
- AWS Bill From $8,000 to $300 a Month on Bare Metal, October 31, 2026.
- Greenleaf Replaced Salesforce and Saves $100,000 a Year, October 20, 2026.
- A Custom CRM Built in 7 Days Saves $26,400 a Year, October 19, 2026.
10
Proof Points#
3 public build posts this month state a monthly saving. Our 176 shared bills establish what this sample paid, but do not establish that replacing those tools would save money.
Against building, the editor's view is to keep paying for identity and security compliance. A high shared bill alone does not settle reliability, audit requirements or liability.
Our editors rate 62 categories: 15 Build it, 35 Build part of it, 12 Keep paying. These are judgments, not buyer outcomes.
11
Predictions#
Our view. These are forecasts for the next monthly edition, not measured findings.
Likely
Partial builds will remain the largest editorial category group.
Wrong if: A different group leading the next edition's category count.
Possible
The next edition will include a verified replacement report.
Wrong if: No verified replacement reports at publication.
Long shot
Verified replacement evidence will show staff time savings exceeding license savings.
Wrong if: No verified report demonstrating that comparison in the next edition.
12
What to Do Next#
Editor's view.
Build it
Start with a bounded internal workflow on data you control. Budget for maintenance and test an export before switching.
Build part of it
Keep necessary infrastructure and replace a workflow around it. Compare license savings and staff time separately.
Keep paying
Keep systems where security, certification or regulated operations exceed your ability to maintain them.
Check Your Own Stack
- Run a spend audit: find seats and tools you no longer need.
- Open the Price Radar: see if your vendors changed prices.
- Write a Review: add your rating so next month counts you.
13
Methodology and Limits#
Launch edition: data starts October 17, 2026, so this edition covers about two weeks. Bills include prices teams stated in public posts. November is the first full month.
Window October 17, 2026 to October 31, 2026. The bill sample is 176 anonymous yearly bills shared in that window. Every tool is named from its first bill, with the number of bills beside it. The number of distinct companies is unknown.
Public data points: 188 data points logged this month, each linked to its source. Claims are self-reported. Verified replacement reports: 0.
Limits of This Sample
- Self-selected: people who share bills and post reviews may be less happy with their vendors than the average buyer.
- Short window: about two weeks of data, so most tools have only a few data points.
- Self-reported: build times and savings are the builders' own claims, usually posted soon after launch.
- Survivor bias: teams whose builds failed rarely post about it.
- Not measured: market pricing, representative savings, build failure rates, ongoing support costs or realized cash savings.
We do not publish private seat counts, headcounts or per-person prices. Read our methodology.
Data is summarized on this page; raw data points are not published, to protect the people who shared them.
14
Sources#
26 documented builds come from public data points. Each is linked next to its number in What Teams Built Instead. Reviews and bills come from HissingKitty submissions.
15
Updates to This Report#
- October 31, 2026: Final edition, data through October 31. The pressure ranking now needs at least 3 shared bills per tool, so a single large bill no longer leads it. Added key facts, sources and this log.
16
Cite This Report#
For Press and Analysts
Free to quote and republish with a link. Every number shows its sample size and source.
HissingKitty, The State of SaaS: Build vs. Buy, October 2026, published October 19, 2026, final October 31, 2026, https://hissingkitty.com/research/build-vs-buy-october-2026
Figures follow our methodology. Estimates are labelled until backed by submitted savings reports.