Paloren's AI Agent Build vs Buy Tool compares a custom build, a platform purchase and a hybrid of the two using your own figures: workflow volume, complexity, integration count and internal capability. Build when the workflow is core and poorly served by platforms. Buy when a platform already does most of the job. Estimates are model figures, not quotes.
Enter your own figures below. The results table and chart update as you type. The default scenario is pre-loaded so you can see the method before you change anything.
Buy the platform. Or build the fit.
| Result | Value |
|---|
Every output comes from the formulas below. Nothing is drawn from a survey, a client result or a third-party benchmark. The figures are model estimates based on the inputs you supply.
| Output | Formula | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Custom monthly cost | setup/24 + monthly cost | Build cost spread over two years plus running cost. |
| Platform monthly cost | tasks x $0.35 x (1 + complexity/10) + integrations x $150 + (3-capability) x $300 | Platform pricing proxy with a capability gap penalty. |
| Cost gap | custom monthly cost - platform monthly cost | Positive means the platform route is cheaper in this model. |
| Two-year gap | cost gap x 24 | Cumulative difference over a two-year horizon. |
A logistics team needs 900 tasks a month with four-way complexity, three integrations and low internal capability. Custom build costs $1,350 a month. The platform proxy costs $1,491 a month, so the custom route is $141 a month cheaper, or $3,384 over two years.
| Input | Value |
|---|---|
| tasks | 900 |
| complexity | 4 |
| integrations | 3 |
| capability | 1 |
| setup | 18,000 |
| monthly | 600 |
This model is deliberately narrow. It values time and direct cost only. It does not price quality improvement, customer satisfaction, risk reduction or revenue lift, because those need evidence from your own operation.
Adoption is the most common source of error. A system that works in a pilot rarely hits its full share on day one. For planning, assume a ramp and test the conservative case.
The model also ignores integration difficulty. Two systems with the same name can differ enormously in effort. List each integration and its owner before you commit budget.
Finally, the figures are not a quote. They are a planning tool. Use them to frame a conversation, then get a scoped proposal based on your actual systems and workflows.
Build when the workflow is core, complex, long-lived and poorly served by generic platforms.
If the task is unique to your operation, a custom agent can fit the process exactly. If a platform already does 80% of the job, buying is usually faster and cheaper.
The model adds cost when internal capability is low, because someone must maintain, monitor and improve the agent.
Low capability does not make a custom build impossible. It means you need a partner or a training plan, and that cost should be visible in the decision.
Agents are longer-lived than a single campaign. Two years is a conservative planning window.
If you expect the workflow to change materially within a year, the build case weakens. Flexibility is a real cost of custom work.
The model prices integration count but not integration difficulty.
Legacy systems, permission walls and data quality issues can turn a simple integration into a project. List each system and its owner before you commit.
Score both routes on cost, control, speed to value and maintenance burden, then pick the one that matches your risk tolerance.
Cost is only one input. A platform may win on speed while a custom build wins on control. Name the trade-off you care about most before you choose.
Paloren provides AI implementation and training. This calculator uses illustrative inputs and the formulas shown here, not client results or a service quotation. Explore Paloren services.
Build when the workflow is core to your revenue or customer experience and no platform serves it well. Building also fits when the agent must run across legacy systems or inside strict security perimeters. Expect 2 to 10 weeks for a first scoped project.
Buy when the use case is common and repeatable, such as standard ticketing or scheduling, and you need it working now. The vendor handles updates, uptime and edge cases. If a platform already does 80 percent of the job, buy it.
Most companies buy the commodity layer and build only the proprietary part: the workflows, integrations and governance that give them an advantage. You get the vendor's updates and uptime where the problem is common, and your own build where the workflow is yours alone.
Score control, speed to value and maintenance alongside cost, not cost only. The tool shows this as a third route beside build and buy.
Low internal capability adds cost and delay to a custom build because your team has to learn to run it. The tool scores this and, when capability is low, points to training as the fix.
Paloren's half-day training starts from $4,500 and the department program from $18,000.
A 24-month window matches how companies judge software payback and smooths the upfront build cost into a monthly figure. Change the inputs to test a shorter or longer window. The figure is a model estimate, not a quote.
The tool counts the number of integrations as a cost input, but it cannot price the risk of a failed connection or a stale record. That risk is why we test edge cases before anyone relies on a build. Treat the outputs as a starting position, not a scoped price.
Talk through the result with Paloren. Bring the workflow, the assumptions and the questions this opened up.
Talk to Paloren
A number is a starting position. The next step is a decision you can defend.
Talk to Paloren