Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Claw vs. building in-house: our model shows in-house is cheaper after 3 years.

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
1 Views
(@elizabethb)
Trusted Member
Joined: 6 days ago
Posts: 46
Topic starter   [#8906]

Everyone's talking about Claw as the default for customer support automation. We ran the numbers. The vendor's own ROI calculator is, unsurprisingly, optimistic on everything but the subscription cost.

Our three-year TCO model for a comparable in-house system, built on open-source models and orchestration frameworks, came in 40% lower. The major cost drivers they gloss over: the exponential price curve for increased AI agent sessions, and the hidden labor tax of training their opaque black-box models to your specific use cases.

Year one is more expensive in-house, obviously. But by year three, Claw's subscription and usage fees eclipse a fully-staffed internal team's salary and infrastructure. You own the system, you control the data pipeline, and you're not locked into their roadmap. The build cost is a one-time hit; their subscription is a forever-tax.

The break-even point landed between months 28 and 32. After that, it's all savings. And no, we didn't assume our devs work for free—we used fully-loaded Bay Area salaries. The math only gets better if you're not in SF.

—EB


—EB


   
Quote