How much does Moxo cost in 2026?

Quick Answer: Moxo's only published price is Team: $500 a month in the monthly view or $5,000 a year in the yearly view, for 100 flows and $100 of AI a year with unlimited seats (moxo.com/pricing, 15 September 2026). Scale (500 flows and $500 of AI a year) and Enterprise are custom quotes. There is no free plan, no published overage rate and no stated trial length, and the dollar AI allowance has no published conversion to the credits Moxo's product logs.

Moxo sells flows, not seats, and publishes exactly one price.

Plan Price as shown Flows AI allowance Seats
Team $500 /mo or $5,000/yr 100 a year $100 of AI a year Unlimited
Scale Custom quote 500 a year $500 of AI a year Unlimited
Enterprise Custom quote Not stated Not stated Unlimited

Source: moxo.com/pricing, monthly and yearly views, 15 September 2026.

What decides the bill: flows and dollars of AI a year

Two meters, and the pricing page defines neither. The flow is defined elsewhere: Moxo's Description of Services, read 15 September 2026, calls it "A single running instance of a Template, carrying its own data and status". In synthetic AutomationAtlas tests, a template's Flows counter rose by one the moment a flow started (14 and 15 September 2026). That doesn't establish how an invoice counts, but it is the question to put to sales: if a flow counts when it starts, every abandoned onboarding is a flow you paid for.

The AI meter is the more interesting one. The pricing page sells "$100 of AI/yr", yet the product still counts credits. On 15 September an audit row in our test read "13 credits consumed (ai credits)" for one AI extract step, and Moxo's API changelog, read 14 September 2026, describes reports that show AI spend "in credits, the unit you buy rather than our provider bill". Moxo publishes no conversion between the two. A dollar allowance plays well in a procurement meeting because it looks like a budget line with a ceiling, but until the credit rate is in writing it is a label, not a price. The builder's estimates move as well: on 14 September it showed "Est. $0.38 per run" for a four-step template before publishing, and $0.17 at a later reading with no step edited.

What free covers: no free plan is listed

There is no free tier to prototype on. As of 15 September 2026, moxo.com/pricing lists Team, Scale and Enterprise but no free plan, and its header links to "Request free trial" without stating a trial length. Treat the pilot as a sales conversation, and get the trial's flow and AI limits stated before you start building.

Metered overage: allowed by the Terms, unpriced on the page

This is where to slow the procurement down. Moxo's Terms and Conditions, read 15 September 2026, say "Service Fees may include one-time fees, subscription fees and overage fees", while moxo.com/pricing stated no overage rate that day. The contract allows a charge the price list doesn't show. Under the same Terms, a price change applies from "the next Subscription Term, which takes place at least sixty (60) days after the notice of the price change". That protects the fee you can see; it can't protect a rate nobody wrote down, so put the overage rate in the order form.

The test workspace's Billing panel was no help either. In AutomationAtlas testing on 26 August and 14 September 2026, it showed no plan name and read "Your plan is managed by Moxo's sales team".

Discounts and floors: Team is the only published price

Team sets the floor at "$500 /mo" or "$5,000/yr" on moxo.com/pricing (15 September 2026). The page doesn't say whether "$500 /mo" is billed monthly, so no annual discount can be read from it. What you can read is the direction of travel: Internet Archive captures record two restructurings between 7 August and 10 September 2026.

Capture date Plans Team allowance
7 Aug 2026 Free, Business, Pro, Enterprise No Team plan
26 Aug 2026 Team, Scale, Enterprise 250 flows and 25,000 AI credits a year
10 Sep 2026 Team, Scale, Enterprise 100 flows and $100 of AI a year

At the unchanged $5,000 a year, the price per included flow at full use went from $20 on the August terms to $50 now, and the most a team can launch without running out before year end fell from about 21 flows a month to about 8 (AutomationAtlas arithmetic from the dated list prices). The AI allowance changed units in the same move. The fee held and the allowance moved, so if you buy, fix the allowance for the term in the contract, not just the fee.

How it compares: Team fits poorly at low volume or without human steps

Per-flow pricing is a bet on volume. At Team's "$5,000/yr" (moxo.com/pricing, 15 September 2026), 100 flows work out at $50 each, and an organisation running 20 flows a year would pay $250 per flow (AutomationAtlas arithmetic). The other side of the ledger is seats: all three plans list unlimited seats, so adding clients, partners or contractors to a flow doesn't raise the bill. Volume beyond 100 flows a year cannot be costed from public sources, and the page lists triggers, webhooks and REST APIs only from Scale, a custom quote.

The meter also shapes design. When every run costs money and seats are free, there is a quiet incentive to cram a whole client relationship into one long flow instead of several clean ones. Decide the process model first, then check it against the meter, not the other way round.

Editor's Note: The number that stuck with me wasn't the $5,000. When we recently built a synthetic four-step template, the builder showed "Est. $0.38 per run" before we had published anything, and a later look showed $0.17 with no step changed. A live cost estimate is genuinely useful, and I'd rather have one than not. But it is quoted in dollars while the audit log counts credits, and Moxo publishes no rate between them, so a buyer can't turn that badge into a budget. The caveat: one template, a workspace that isn't a Team plan, and we never learned why the estimate moved, so get the credit rate from Moxo in writing before you plan against it. — Rafal Fila, ShadowGen

Related Questions

Written & reviewed by Rafal Fila · Last updated:

Related Tools

Related Rankings

Best Automation Platforms for AI Orchestration 2026

This ranking answers one question: how many real business applications can an AI agent act on out of the box? It evaluates nine platforms as of August 2026 on the reach they give an agent, not on the workflow logic they can express. That boundary is deliberate, because two neighbouring pages on this site answer different questions. Best Process Orchestration Platforms 2026 scores multi-step process control, error handling and state management. Best AI Agent Platforms 2026 scores building and hosting the agent itself. This page scores the layer between them: the connective tissue that lets an agent already built elsewhere reach the applications a business actually runs on. A platform that leads one of those pages can place low here, and two of them do. Scores derive from application and action catalogue counts, the exposure model each platform uses to publish those catalogues to an agent, setup effort, failure handling and cost per agent action. Every figure was retrieved from a vendor-owned surface on 11 August 2026 unless an earlier date is stated against it.

Best Durable Workflow Engines for Production in 2026

A ranked list of the best durable workflow engines for production deployments in 2026. Durable workflow engines persist execution state to a database so that long-running workflows survive process restarts, deployments, and infrastructure failures. The ranking covers Temporal, Prefect, Apache Airflow, Camunda, Windmill, and n8n. Tools were evaluated on production reliability, developer experience, scalability, open-source health, and documentation quality. The shortlist intentionally mixes code-first engines (Temporal, Prefect, Airflow) with hybrid visual platforms (Camunda, Windmill, n8n) to reflect how production teams actually choose workflow engines in 2026.

Dive Deeper

guide

Client Portals vs Workflow Orchestration Platforms: What Changes When External Parties Act Inside a Process

What changes when a client or supplier has to act inside your process, not just watch it? This guide compares four client portals with four orchestration platforms on how outsiders get in, whether you pay for them and what the audit log records, from vendor sources read 14 and 15 September 2026.

comparison

Moxo vs Zapier in 2026: Human Approval Steps, External Participants and Pricing

Moxo and Zapier both put a person in front of an automated decision, from opposite ends: Moxo builds the process out of human steps and attaches AI, while Zapier pauses an automation for a reviewer through its Human in the Loop app. This guide compares approvers, rejection, AI approval, audit logs, governance and pricing, verified 14 and 15 September 2026.

comparison

Keystroke vs n8n in 2026: Agent-Built TypeScript vs the Visual Canvas

Keystroke, launched in July 2026 by Y Combinator W24 company Sprint Labs, is a code-first automation platform where AI coding agents write workflows as TypeScript in the user's repository. n8n, founded in 2019, is the most widely deployed source-available visual workflow platform, with 200,000+ users and a $2.5 billion valuation. This comparison covers the agent-authored versus canvas building models, durable execution, licensing (Elastic License 2.0 vs the Sustainable Use License), verified July 2026 pricing including Keystroke's usage metering, and the maturity gap between a days-old platform and an established ecosystem.