Updated October 2026
If your Gumloop workflows exist to answer one question (where does our brand show up when buyers ask AI engines about our category, and what do we do about the gaps), a general-purpose node builder is the wrong tool for the job.
The best Gumloop alternatives for marketers in 2026 are Mentionova, Zapier, Make, Lindy, Tines, Dust, and Pipedream, with Mentionova ranked first for marketers whose Gumloop workflows center on AI visibility monitoring and content research rather than general-purpose automation. Each tool below is listed with a neutral description of what it does:
- Mentionova - AI visibility and content platform that tracks brand mentions and citations across six AI engines and turns gaps into ready content briefs.
- Zapier - app-to-app automation platform connecting more than 9,000 apps and AI tools through trigger-and-action workflows.
- Make - visual, no-code workflow builder that runs multi-step automations on a credit-metered free and paid plan structure.
- Lindy - AI teammate that connects to company tools and performs scheduled, approval-gated work for a team.
- Tines - workflow platform built for IT and security teams running governed, audited automations and AI-native agents across their tech stack.
- Dust - multiplayer AI platform that connects company knowledge and tools so people and agents can work from shared context.
- Pipedream - API integration and workflow platform for building, running, and deploying AI agents across thousands of connected tools.
| Tool | SEO/AEO/GEO monitoring & content gap diagnosis | Reddit engagement / monitoring | Entry-level price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mentionova | Yes, runs buying questions through AI engines, logs mentions and citations, diagnoses gaps, delivers ranked plays with ready briefs | Yes, included on every plan (drafted replies only) | $125/mo ($99/mo billed annually) |
| Zapier | Not published | Not published | $0/mo (Free) / $19.99/mo (Professional, annual) |
| Make | Not published | Not published | $0/mo (Free) |
| Lindy | Not published | Not published | $29.99/mo per user (Plus) |
| Tines | Not published | Not published | $0/mo (Free edition) |
Marketers who outgrow a general-purpose workflow builder usually aren't looking for a bigger node canvas. Marketers are looking for something that already knows which AI engines to check, what to ask, and what to do when a competitor appears in the answer instead of them.
Why Marketers Start Looking for Gumloop Alternatives
Gumloop is agent infrastructure for building AI workflows that can browse, sign in, and complete multi-step tasks node by node. Marketing teams use it for outreach, lead enrichment, and research.
Agents can open a browser, sign in with saved logins, click, type, and pull data from sites, handing control back to a person when a site needs human input. Teams assemble these capabilities by piecing together triggers, connectors, and AI model calls.
Three recurring issues push teams to look at Gumloop alternatives for marketers specifically:
Credit costs are hard to predict. An independent review found that Gumloop's Pro plan burns more than 300 credits in a single 10-item batch run when a workflow uses expert-tier AI models, even though the plan is marketed around a flat 20,000-credit allowance. The same review notes that unused credits do not roll over between billing cycles. A separate review describes the underlying mechanic plainly: model use converts to credits, with a one-credit base charge per successful connector call plus the connector's own cost layered on top.
Concurrency limits cap scale even on paid plans. The same independent review reports that Gumloop's Pro tier includes 5 concurrent workflow runs and 25 concurrent agent chats, despite advertising unlimited seats and teams.
It's a newer platform. A market comparison describes Gumloop as a very new platform, founded in 2023, with potential for growing pains and breaking changes, and notes it is less proven at enterprise scale compared to established competitors. Gumloop's current pricing offers a Pro plan starting at $37/mo with included credits and an Enterprise custom plan.
How We Evaluated These Gumloop Alternatives
Each tool below was assessed on what it actually does (not marketing copy), how its pricing and credit or task metering works, what it connects to, and whether it publishes details on approval gating and enterprise governance. Where a platform's own site was the only source for a figure, that figure is stated with attribution and never linked, since vendor-owned pages aren't used as citation links. Independent reviews and comparison sites are linked directly.
1. Mentionova
Mentionova is built specifically for that problem: a complete SEO and AEO/GEO platform that uses more than 100 growth agents to run research, monitoring, content production, and reporting across six AI engines, with every output queued for a one-click sign-off so the marketing team keeps final approval.
The core loop runs a buying question across six AI engines: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Reddit. For example, it might run "best payment orchestration platform" across all six. Each run logs whether the brand was named, whether its site was cited, its position in the answer, and its sentiment. It also records every source the engine relied on. Diagnostics pinpoint exactly where an answer leaks, by engine, by prompt, and by source, and each gap becomes a ranked play, such as refreshing a page, earning a mention on a specific site, or answering a thread, ordered by expected citation lift. Because no pixel or code needs to be installed, a workspace can go live and return its first signal in about two minutes.
Reddit carries unusual weight in this workflow. Reddit is cited in roughly 40% of all AI answers across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews. That is why Mentionova includes Reddit engagement on every plan, drafting replies for review rather than posting on a brand's behalf. Mentionova's Competitor Analysis Tool runs the same tracked prompts for a brand and its rivals across all six engines. It computes weekly share of voice and drafts a counter-page when a competitor is winning, with nothing publishing automatically.
One documented outcome illustrates the diagnose-to-play loop in practice. Genesys Growth reported 10,000 organic impressions a day and a 192% increase in clicks. It also gained 170 monthly sessions from AI engines within three months of rebuilding its pages and schema around buyer questions.
Key Features
- Tracks mentions, citations, position, and sentiment across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Reddit
- Diagnoses answer gaps by engine, prompt, and source, then converts each gap into a ranked play with a ready brief
- Reddit engagement drafts replies on every plan, including Starter, without auto-posting
- Competitor Analysis computes weekly share of voice against named rivals and drafts counter-pages for review
- Connects Search Console, GA4, G2, Notion, HubSpot, and Webflow alongside the six AI engines, each in one click
- No pixel or code required; re-syncs daily with OAuth for Google properties
Pricing
Starter is $125/mo billed monthly or $99/mo billed annually, covering 25 tracked prompts, 100 agentic tasks a month, three AI engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews), one workspace, and three seats. Scale is $400/mo monthly or $320/mo annually, covering 100 tracked prompts, 500 agentic tasks a month, and all six engines. Enterprise is $999/mo monthly or $799/mo annually, covering 250 tracked prompts and 2,500 agentic tasks a month. Annual billing saves roughly 20% across every tier, and every self-serve plan includes a free trial.
See how Mentionova tracks AI visibility and drafts content plays before you rebuild a Gumloop workflow from scratch.
2. Zapier
Zapier is an AI orchestration platform for building automated workflows across apps, built around a trigger-and-action structure called a Zap. Each Zap connects one trigger to one or more actions, and successful actions consume tasks against a monthly allowance. Per Zapier's own pricing page, the platform includes Zap workflows, Tables, Forms, and Zapier MCP, and connects Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, and more than 230 other AI tools alongside its broader app catalog. Coverage spans common marketing and operations software, including Slack, Salesforce, HubSpot, Dropbox, and Microsoft Teams.
Zapier's free plan runs on an individual account with 100 tasks a month. The Professional plan is billed annually after a 14-day trial and covers 750 tasks a month on an individual account. The Team plan includes 25 users. When a task limit is reached mid-cycle, Zap workflows pause until the next billing period starts.
Key Features
- Multi-step Zaps with filters, paths, and a formatter step
- Visual no-code editor with Zap version control
- Custom error notifications when a step fails
- An AI manager agent that detects workflow issues and attempts fixes automatically
- Zapier MCP for connecting AI agents to Zapier-managed actions
Pricing
Professional is $19.99/month billed annually after a 14-day free trial, covering 750 tasks a month on one user. Team is $69/month billed annually, covering 25 users. Enterprise pricing is a custom quote.
3. Make
Make is a visual, no-code workflow builder that runs automations through a credit-metering system, where one standard module action equals one credit. Per Make's own pricing page, the free plan includes 1,000 credits a month, access to more than 3,500 apps, routers and filters for branching logic, customer support, and a 15-minute minimum interval between scheduled runs. Extra purchased credits expire after one month on monthly billing or at the end of one year on annual billing for paid tiers. A separate review of Make's billing model confirms that pricing is based on credit volume rather than seats, with unlimited users reported across all five plans, including Free.
Key Features
- Visual, drag-and-drop workflow builder
- Routers and filters for conditional branching
- More than 3,500 pre-built app connections on the free plan
- Credit-based billing that scales with usage rather than seat count
Pricing
Paid tiers (Core, Pro, Teams) are reported by independent coverage at annual-equivalent rates of $9, $16, and $29 per month for 10,000 credits, or $10.59, $18.82, and $34.12 on monthly billing. Enterprise pricing is a custom quote.
4. Lindy
Lindy is an AI teammate that connects to a company's existing tools, maintains persistent workspace context, and performs work through scheduled routines, skills, and model selection. Per Lindy's own pricing page, credits measure the work Lindy does, and every seat added to a workspace contributes its credit allowance to a shared pool that refreshes each billing cycle and does not roll over. Anything with outside impact, such as sending an email or publishing a document, waits for approval before it happens.
Lindy also ships a Slack-native assistant called Lindy Teammate that works inside threads and mentions. An independent report on its August 2026 launch confirms pricing starting at $29.99 per user per month on the Plus plan, which includes 3,000 monthly credits drawn from the team's shared pool. In February 2026, a separate review noted Lindy relaunched as a personal AI executive assistant that connects to Gmail or Outlook, triages inboxes, drafts replies, schedules meetings, and sends daily briefs.
Key Features
- Slack-native teammate operating in threads and mentions
- Scheduled routines and persistent workspace context across tools
- More than 40 built-in skills, with the option to create custom ones
- Built-in approval gating before any action with outside impact
- MCP support with access to all available models
Pricing
Per Lindy's own pricing page, Pro is $99.99/mo per user for 15,000 credits per user per month, and Max is $199.99/mo per user for 35,000 credits per user per month. Enterprise is a custom quote.
5. Tines
Tines is a workflow platform built for IT and security teams running AI-native agents, apps, and automations under governance controls. Per Tines's own pricing page, the platform is vendor-agnostic and covers a team's entire tech stack, including Claude Code, Vercel, GitHub, and other AI models. It identifies anomalies and suggests fixes while keeping a team in control of what actually goes live.
The free edition includes three live workflows and a one-time $50 AI allowance. The Community Edition, per the same pricing page, limits teams to 3 flows, 1 licensed team, 1 user, and 25,000 monthly events with 50 monthly AI run-time credits. Business and Enterprise edition pricing is not published and requires contacting Tines directly.
Key Features
- Visibility across AI-created work for IT and security review
- Scheduling and monitoring across connected systems
- Audit logs and SSO on paid editions
- Controls that let security teams approve what goes live without blocking day-to-day automation
Pricing
Community Edition includes 3 flows, 1 licensed team, 1 user, and 25,000 monthly events. Business and Enterprise edition pricing is not published.
6. Dust
Dust is a multiplayer AI platform for human-agent collaboration that connects company knowledge, tools, and teams so organizations can create, share, and run agents across real workflows. Per Dust's own pricing page, it pulls context together across Slack, CRM systems, docs, and other connected systems so agents can act with the full picture rather than a narrow view, and it supports models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Mistral, and DeepSeek.
On governance, Dust's own pricing page lists SSO support through Okta, Entra ID, and Jumpcloud, along with audit logs on its higher tiers.
Key Features
- Custom agents built from a team's own skills, knowledge, and tools
- Multi-agent workflows that run on schedules and triggers
- Shared collaborative workspaces with persistent context across conversations
- More than 70 out-of-the-box MCP connectors
- SSO through Okta, Entra ID, and Jumpcloud, plus audit logs on paid tiers
Pricing
Per Dust's own pricing page, Free is 0€ for 500 lifetime credits. Pro is 24€ per seat per month billed yearly, or 30€ per month, for 8,000 credits a month. Max is 120€ per seat per month billed yearly, or 150€ per month, for 40,000 credits a month. Enterprise is a custom quote, and the Business tier is scoped for teams up to 100 people.
7. Pipedream
Pipedream is a workflow and API integration platform for connecting software and building, running, and deploying AI agents. Per Pipedream's own pricing page, it provides workflow triggers, actions, and multi-step workflows, plus SDKs and APIs for adding integrations directly into an app or agent. Credits are consumed by action executions, tool calls, trigger emits on deployed triggers, and requests through its Connect proxy, with coverage spanning more than 3,000 APIs across Node.js, Python, and Go.
The free plan caps usage at 100 credits a month, 3 active workflows, and 3 connected accounts, with a daily credit limit that cannot be exceeded. Pipedream's own pricing page also states that its legacy Workflows and String products are scheduled to shut down on March 31, 2027.
Key Features
- One SDK supporting thousands of integrations
- MCP servers for both consumer and developer use cases
- One-click OAuth and key-based authentication for connected accounts
- Source-available triggers and actions
- Workflow orchestration and control flow across multi-step automations
Pricing
Basic is $29/mo ($348 billed annually) for 2,000 credits a month. Advanced is $49/mo ($588 billed annually) for 2,000 credits a month. Connect is $99/mo ($1,188 billed annually) for 10,000 credits a month. Business is custom pricing.
Gumloop Alternatives at a Glance: Full Comparison
| Dimension | Mentionova | Gumloop | Zapier | Make | Lindy | Tines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry-level price | $125/mo ($99/mo annual) | $37/mo (Pro entry) / Enterprise: custom | $0/mo (Free) / $19.99/mo (Professional, annual) | $0/mo (Free) | $29.99/mo per user (Plus) | $0/mo (Free edition) |
| AI engines / platforms monitored | 3 engines on Starter; 6 on Scale and above | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published |
| SEO/AEO/GEO monitoring & content gap diagnosis | Yes, runs buying questions through AI engines, logs mentions/citations, diagnoses gaps, delivers ranked plays with ready briefs | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published |
| Reddit engagement / monitoring | Yes, included on every plan (drafted replies only) | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published | Not published |
| MCP support | Not published | Not published | Yes, Zapier MCP | Not published | Yes, MCP support across all models | Not published |
Lower entry prices on general-purpose automation platforms reflect a different product: Zapier, Make, and Tines sell workflow building, not AI-engine monitoring. Mentionova's Starter plan bundles purpose-built AI visibility tracking, ready content briefs, and Reddit engagement into its price, which isn't a line item any of the tools above currently publish.
Agent Interoperability and Governance Across Alternatives
MCP support varies across this group. Per Lindy's own pricing page, Lindy offers MCP support across all its available models. Per Zapier's own pricing page, Zapier ships Zapier MCP as part of its orchestration layer. Dust reports more than 70 out-of-the-box MCP connectors. Gumloop's documentation describes an agent-first API that supports creating agents, starting chat sessions, and triggering automations programmatically, though it does not publish an MCP connector count. Make and Tines do not publish MCP-specific figures.
On governance, Gumloop's own documentation describes a human-in-the-loop feature that can require approval before an agent sends emails, creates repositories, or deletes records.
Tines and Dust both publish audit logs and SSO on paid tiers, per their respective pricing pages, with Dust naming Okta, Entra ID, and Jumpcloud specifically. Lindy requires approval for anything with outside impact by default, regardless of plan.
Pricing, Credits, and the Real Cost of Switching
Most of these platforms meter usage through credits rather than flat seats, and the conversion between a credit and a workflow run is rarely one-to-one. That variability produces the cost spikes independent reviewers have flagged.
Per Gumloop's own documentation, the same agent might cost 2 credits for a quick question and 200 credits for a deep research task. Gumloop also applies an 8% orchestration fee on top of model, tool, and compute usage, per the same documentation.
Make's credits also scale with usage rather than seats, and unused purchased credits expire within a fixed window rather than carrying forward indefinitely. Pipedream's free tier caps out at 100 credits a month with a hard daily ceiling. Lindy pools credits across the team, so adding a teammate changes the effective budget for everyone already using the workspace, while Dust assigns monthly credit allocations per seat on its Business plan and offers workspace-pooled credits on Enterprise. Zapier is the outlier in this group, metering tasks rather than variable-cost credits, which makes its monthly ceiling easier to predict even though its task allowance on lower tiers is modest.
Mentionova's plans are priced around tracked prompts and agentic tasks rather than per-connector-call credits, so a marketing team evaluating the switch is comparing a monitoring and content budget, not a workflow-execution budget.
Gumloop Alternatives by Use Case
General app-to-app automation, such as syncing a lead form to a CRM or triggering a Slack message from a form submission, is the core use case for Zapier and Make. Teams needing AI-teammate style assistants that work inside existing chat tools and calendars typically look at Lindy or Dust, both of which connect to a company's existing software rather than replacing it. Tines is built specifically for IT and security teams that need audited, governed automations, per its own pricing page. Pipedream sits closer to the developer end, built around APIs, SDKs, and code-level workflow control.
Marketing teams whose Gumloop workflows exist to answer one recurring question, where does our brand show up in AI answers and what do we do about the gaps, need a different tool. None of the general-purpose builders above are purpose-built for that question. Mentionova is.
How to Switch From Gumloop Without Disrupting Workflows
- Inventory every live Gumloop flow and its monthly credit usage before touching anything, so nothing gets rebuilt that was already scheduled to be retired.
- Map each Gumloop component to its equivalent in the new platform. This covers triggers, connectors, and AI model calls, without redesigning the workflow from scratch.
- Run the rebuilt workflow in parallel with the original Gumloop flow for one full cycle, comparing outputs rather than assuming equivalence.
- Keep the original Gumloop flow paused, not deleted, until the new workflow has matched expected output for at least two consecutive cycles.
- Retire the Gumloop version only after the parallel run confirms the new workflow produces the same (or better) result on the metric that matters, whether that's leads captured, replies sent, or, for AI visibility work, citations earned.
Final Verdict
Teams leaving Gumloop for general-purpose automation are trading one node-based builder for another. Teams leaving Gumloop because their actual goal was AI visibility, competitor tracking, and content gap diagnosis are better served by a platform built around that specific loop. Mentionova runs buying questions across six AI engines, including ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Reddit, diagnoses exactly where an answer leaks by engine, prompt, and source, and turns each gap into a ranked play with a ready-to-publish brief, all with final approval staying with the marketing team. Starter plans begin at $99/mo billed annually, with Reddit engagement included from day one.
Book a demo to see how Mentionova diagnoses AI visibility gaps before you rebuild another Gumloop workflow.
FAQ: Gumloop Alternatives
What is the best alternative to Gumloop?
The right choice depends on what the Gumloop workflow was actually doing. Zapier and Make are built around app-to-app automation; Lindy and Dust are built around AI-teammate style assistants. For marketing teams whose Gumloop use case was AI visibility monitoring, competitor tracking, or content gap diagnosis rather than general automation, Mentionova is built specifically for that workflow.
Is there a free alternative to Gumloop?
Several tools in this category publish free tiers. Zapier's free plan includes 100 tasks a month for one user. Make's free plan includes 1,000 credits a month with access to more than 3,500 apps, per Make's own pricing page. Tines offers a free edition with three live workflows and a one-time $50 AI allowance. Pipedream's free plan caps at 100 credits a month. Each free tier has different limits on volume, concurrency, and user count, so the right fit depends on workflow size rather than price alone.
Marketing teams specifically needing AI visibility monitoring can also start with a free trial on every Mentionova self-serve plan.
Is Gumloop better than Zapier?
They solve different problems. Gumloop centers on AI agents that can browse, sign into accounts, and complete multi-step tasks, while Zapier centers on connecting more than 9,000 apps through trigger-and-action workflows, per Zapier's own pricing page. Neither is strictly better; a team choosing between them is usually choosing between agent-style task completion and broad app-to-app connectivity. Marketing teams specifically trying to monitor AI visibility and brand citations are better served by a platform built for that question, such as Mentionova.
What is the difference between Gumloop and Make?
Gumloop is built around AI agents that browse, sign into tools, and complete tasks using connectors. Its pricing is metered through credits that vary by model and task complexity, per its own site. Make is a visual, no-code workflow builder where one standard module action equals one credit, with a free plan covering 1,000 credits a month and more than 3,500 app connections, per Make's own pricing page. Make's workflows are generally more deterministic and predictable to cost out; Gumloop's agent-based runs can vary more in credit cost per the task.
Which Gumloop alternative supports human approval workflows?
Several do. Lindy requires approval by default for anything with outside impact, such as sending an email or publishing a document. Mentionova's agents research, draft, and compile work around the clock, then hand it over for a one-click sign-off, so nothing publishes without the marketing team's final approval.
How much does Gumloop cost compared with Zapier and Make?
Gumloop's Pro plan starts at $37/mo after a 14-day trial for 20,000 credits, scaling to $801/mo for 435,000 credits, plus an 8% orchestration fee on usage, per its own pricing page. Zapier's free plan includes 100 tasks a month, with Professional at $19.99/mo billed annually for 750 tasks a month. Make's free plan includes 1,000 credits a month, with paid tiers reported at annual-equivalent rates of $9, $16, and $29 per month for 10,000 credits. The three platforms use different units: credits versus tasks. A fair cost comparison depends on how heavily a workflow relies on AI model calls versus simple app triggers.
Can Gumloop replace Zapier?
For some use cases, yes; for others, no. Gumloop's agents can complete browser-based, multi-step tasks that a simple trigger-and-action Zap can't, but Zapier connects to a much broader catalog of apps and typically costs less to run at low volume. Teams tend to keep both for different jobs rather than treating one as a full replacement for the other.
What are the concurrency limits on Gumloop's paid plans?
Per independent reviews, Gumloop's Pro tier includes 5 concurrent workflow runs and 25 concurrent agent chats, despite advertising unlimited seats and teams. Teams running high-volume parallel workflows may hit those ceilings before exhausting their monthly credit allowance, which is a separate constraint from the credit cost issue.
How do I migrate from Gumloop to another automation platform?
Start by inventorying every live Gumloop flow and its credit usage, then map each trigger, connector, and AI model call to its equivalent in the new platform rather than redesigning from scratch. Run the rebuilt workflow in parallel with the original for a full cycle, compare outputs, and keep the original Gumloop flow paused rather than deleted until the new version has matched results for at least two consecutive cycles.
Does Gumloop have a credit rollover policy?
No. Per independent reviews, unused Gumloop credits do not roll over between billing cycles, and the platform applies an 8% orchestration fee on top of model, tool, and compute usage. This means a team that under-uses its plan in one month loses those credits entirely, while a team that runs heavy AI-model workflows can exceed its expected spend due to the variable credit cost per task.