Ramp vs Expensify

Ramp is a card programme with free software that automates policy, receipt matching and accounting sync for US companies. Expensify is the receipt scanner employees already know, priced per user with a usable free tier and wide accounting support. Finance teams redesigning spend around a card choose Ramp; teams that only need receipts captured and reimbursed choose Expensify.

Vendors can pay for visibility on this site; it never changes what we say about a product. How that works.

01

Ramp and Expensify side by side

RampExpensify
Our expense management rank#9 of 14#8 of 14
Established inUnited StatesUnited States
PricingFree plan; Plus $15 per user per month plus a platform fee, published; Enterprise customPer user per month, published; free tier
Free tierYesYes
Open source——
Self-hostable——
Built forA US company that wants strong automation on a free planA team that needs receipt scanning and nothing more
Not forA European employerA finance function that wants European card issuing

Both are reviewed in full in our expense management ranking: Ramp and Expensify.

02

Where they differ

Ramp 2 · Expensify 0 · open 2
  1. 01

    The pricing meter

    Ramp charges nothing for software and earns from card interchange. Expensify charges per user per month at a published rate, with a free tier that is genuinely usable. Expensify's pricing model has also changed in ways customers found aggressive. For predictability Ramp's meter is simpler, provided you are willing to put spend on its card.

    Edge: Ramp

  2. 02

    A card programme or a scanning app

    These solve different problems. Ramp starts from the card and builds policy enforcement around it. Expensify starts from the receipt, with SmartScan as the feature people know, and is best for a team that needs receipt scanning and nothing more. A company happy with its existing cards gains little from Ramp; one without control gains little from scanning.

    Depends on the buyer

  3. 03

    Closing the books

    Ramp's automation is described as removing most of the manual close, with receipt matching and accounting sync included in the free product. Expensify is tagged for wide accounting support, so it connects to many ledgers, but our data presents it as a capture tool more than a close-automation one. For reducing month-end work, Ramp has the stronger case.

    Edge: Ramp

  4. 04

    How it arrives in the company

    Expensify spreads bottom-up: individuals adopt it without asking, which means finance often inherits it instead of choosing it, and the company's public behaviour has itself become a procurement consideration for some buyers. Ramp is a card programme, so taking it on is a decision finance has to make deliberately. Easy adoption favours Expensify; a considered rollout favours Ramp.

    Depends on the buyer

03

When neither fits

A European company wanting cards and receipts together is poorly served by both: Ramp's coverage outside the United States is limited and Expensify is not the pick for European card issuing. Pleo covers that case, and Zoho Expense handles reports, mileage and approvals cheaply without its own cards.

04

Ramp or Expensify: questions

3 answers
Is Ramp a replacement for Expensify?

For a US company, largely yes: Ramp includes receipt matching, policy enforcement and accounting sync at no software cost.

The switch also means adopting Ramp's card, which is how the product is funded. If you only want receipts scanned and keep your current cards, Expensify remains the simpler tool.

Which is cheaper, Ramp or Expensify?

Ramp has no software fee at all, while Expensify charges per user per month above its free tier. Ramp's cost is indirect, through interchange on card spend. For a small team that only scans receipts, Expensify's free tier may be enough.

Does Ramp or Expensify integrate better with accounting software?

Expensify is tagged for wide accounting support, so breadth of connections is its strength. Ramp's accounting sync is part of automation strong enough to remove most of the manual close.

Test either with a real transaction during the trial, since the handover is where time is saved.

—

More comparisons