{ "data": { "a": { "slug": "gusto", "name": "Gusto", "vendor": "Gusto, Inc.", "vendorUrl": "https://gusto.com", "kind": "http-api", "category": "payroll", "summary": "Gusto Embedded Payroll is a REST API for running US payroll inside another product, covering company and worker onboarding, payroll calculation and submission, tax filing and contractor payments. Production access needs a partnership with Gusto. A demo environment is self-serve.", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gusto", "markdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gusto.md", "slimMarkdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gusto.min.md", "jsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/gusto.json", "repo": "https://github.com/Gusto/gusto-typescript-client", "license": "Proprietary service under Gusto's API Policy and Developer Terms of Service. The API clients on GitHub are MIT, and the React SDK and the Gusto CLI are Apache-2.0", "transports": [ "http" ], "packages": [ { "registry": "npm", "name": "@gusto/embedded-api" }, { "registry": "npm", "name": "@gusto/embedded-react-sdk" }, { "registry": "pypi", "name": "gusto-embedded" } ], "auth": "oauth", "authNotes": "Graded on the Embedded Payroll API, which needs a partnership. A developer signs up at dev.gusto.com, creates an organisation and an application, and gets a client ID and secret for the demo environment. POST /oauth/token with `grant_type` system_access returns a two-hour system token for partner-level calls, and creating a partner-managed company returns an access and refresh token pair for that company alone. Scopes are assigned by Gusto, and production keys follow commercial, security and implementation reviews. Access to an existing employer's Gusto account is separate. Partner apps use the App Integrations API with the OAuth 2.0 authorisation code grant after Production Pre-Approval and a security review. A customer's own company is reached through the Gusto CLI or the Gusto MCP server, which sign in by OAuth with dynamic client registration and PKCE.", "pricing": "paid", "pricingNotes": "No price could be read. gusto.com and embedded.gusto.com answered our reader with a bot check, and the developer docs carry no figures. The introduction says commercial conversations are required before production, and an invoices endpoint returns the active companies used to calculate a partner's invoice. The demo environment is open to any developer with a Developer Portal account, with generated demo companies and no contract (checked 2026-10-08).", "priceSummary": "Paid", "where": "local", "x402": { "level": "no", "evidence": "No x402, MPP or L402 in the developer docs, the API reference or the llms.txt index (checked 2026-10-08).", "endpoints": [] }, "toolCount": null, "popularity": { "githubStars": 2, "npmWeekly": 24731, "pypiWeekly": null, "asOf": "2026-10-08" }, "docsUrl": "https://docs.gusto.com/embedded-payroll/docs/introduction", "llmsTxt": "https://docs.gusto.com/llms.txt", "capabilities": [ "payroll.run", "payroll.employees", "payroll.embedded", "payroll.tax-filing", "payroll.contractors", "hr.onboarding", "hr.time-off" ], "tags": [ "hosted", "payroll", "oauth", "partner-approval", "sandbox", "llms-txt", "webhooks", "typescript", "python", "java", "csharp", "ruby", "mcp", "cli", "status-page" ], "lastRelease": "2026-10-01", "graded": true, "anchor": { "graded": true, "score": 63.3, "grade": "B", "agentReady": false, "rank": 314, "ranked": true, "rankOf": 722, "categoryRank": 4, "methodology": "0.4", "run": "2026-10-01", "scores": { "ergonomics": 82, "maintenance": 76, "payments": 15, "reliability": 58, "schema": 86, "security": 60, "transparency": 61 }, "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "assessment": { "confidence": "medium", "date": "2026-10-08" }, "negative": 0, "verdict": "This listing covers the Embedded Payroll API. Every reference page carries an OpenAPI 3.1 definition, payroll is calculated as a preview before submission, and each API version gets 12 months of deprecation support. Production needs commercial and security approval, no price was readable, and the status page lists 11 incidents between 14 July and 5 October 2026, five marked major.", "bestFor": "A software platform that wants to run US payroll for its own customers and can pass Gusto's partner reviews.", "strengths": [ "Each of 317 reference pages serves an OpenAPI 3.1 definition as Markdown, and llms.txt indexes both documentation projects", "Payroll runs in steps (prepare, calculate, submit). Calculate returns a preview with `submission_blockers` before any money moves", "Each API version gets 12 months of phased support after deprecation, with dates published and `Deprecation`, `Sunset` and `Link` response headers", "Company access tokens work for one company only, expire after two hours and rotate the refresh token on use", "Rate limit of 200 requests a minute per application and user, with `Retry-After` and `X-RateLimit-*` headers on responses" ], "weaknesses": [ "Production keys need commercial, security and implementation reviews with Gusto's partnerships team, and the docs say not all use cases are supported", "The Embedded API status page lists 11 incidents between 14 July and 5 October 2026, five marked major, one titled a complete outage", "No price was readable. gusto.com and embedded.gusto.com answered our reader with a bot check, and the docs carry no figures", "Idempotency keys were found only on the People Batch endpoint. Other POST calls rely on the caller not repeating them", "The five API clients are labelled beta, and the README warns of breaking changes without notice" ], "agentNotes": [ "Develop against https://api.gusto-demo.com. Production at https://api.gusto.com needs keys Gusto issues after its reviews", "Send `X-Gusto-API-Version: 2026-06-15` on every call. Without it the application's minimum version applies", "Send the resource's current `version` with every PUT, and only the fields to change. A stale version returns 409", "Calculate and submit return 202. Poll GET on the payroll until `calculated_at` is set or the status is processed, and read `submission_blockers` first", "For a company already on Gusto, the Embedded API is the wrong route. Use the Gusto CLI or the MCP server at https://mcp.api.gusto.com, which draft payroll but can't submit it" ], "metrics": { "kind": "remote", "measured": false }, "reviewCount": 0, "avgRating": 0, "history": [ { "basis": "public evidence", "confidence": "medium", "grade": "B", "methodology": "0.4", "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run", "score": 63.3 } ], "editorialScores": { "ergonomics": 82, "maintenance": 76, "payments": 15, "reliability": 58, "schema": 86, "security": 60, "transparency": 44 }, "provenanceScore": 77 }, "connect": { "install": "npm add @gusto/embedded-api", "http": "curl --location --request POST 'https://api.gusto-demo.com/oauth/token' \\\n--header 'Content-Type: application/json' \\\n--data-raw '{\n \"client_id\": \"{{client_id}}\",\n \"client_secret\": \"{{client_secret}}\",\n \"grant_type\": \"system_access\"\n}'" }, "letme": { "capability": "https://letme.dev/payroll.run", "tool": "https://letme.dev/gusto" }, "area": "domain-data", "provenance": { "legalEntity": "Gusto, Inc.", "domain": "gusto.com", "domainRegistered": "1995-08-23", "endpointOnVendorDomain": true, "terms": "https://gusto.com/about/terms/developer-terms-of-service", "privacy": "", "statusPage": "https://gustoapi.statuspage.io", "changelog": "https://docs.gusto.com/embedded-payroll/changelog", "securityTxt": "unknown", "checked": "2026-10-08", "notes": [ "The NOTICE file in Gusto/gusto-cli reads Copyright 2026 Gusto, Inc.", "Production calls go to https://api.gusto.com. The demo environment is on a separate domain, api.gusto-demo.com.", "The terms URL is the one named in the OpenAPI definitions on the reference pages. gusto.com answered our reader with a bot check, so the terms, the privacy policy and /.well-known/security.txt weren't read.", "The API Policy published in the docs is dated 11 July 2022 and refers to Gusto's Privacy Policy without a readable link.", "RDAP for gusto.com gives a registration date of 1995-08-23.", "The docs embed https://gustoapi.statuspage.io as the API status page. status.gusto.com covers the Gusto product and also lists an API component." ], "score": 77 }, "pageJsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gusto.json", "live": { "slug": "gusto", "vendorStatus": { "page": "https://gustoapi.statuspage.io", "indicator": "none", "summary": "All Systems Operational", "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T22:39:23.856884406Z" }, "versions": [ { "registry": "github", "name": "Gusto/gusto-typescript-client", "version": "gusto_embedded_v_2025_11_15/v0.3.2", "released": "2026-10-01", "seenAt": "2026-10-08T16:15:29.553541966Z" }, { "registry": "npm", "name": "@gusto/embedded-api", "version": "0.16.2", "seenAt": "2026-10-08T16:15:25.588820008Z" }, { "registry": "npm", "name": "@gusto/embedded-react-sdk", "version": "0.56.5", "seenAt": "2026-10-08T16:15:29.142122622Z" }, { "registry": "pypi", "name": "gusto-embedded", "version": "0.2.4", "released": "2025-04-16", "seenAt": "2026-10-08T16:15:29.349450484Z" } ], "githubStars": 2, "npmWeekly": 24731, "pypiWeekly": 104, "securityTxt": { "url": "https://gusto.com/.well-known/security.txt", "state": "unknown", "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T15:38:35.992448629Z" }, "pages": [ { "url": "https://docs.gusto.com/embedded-payroll/changelog", "kind": "changelog", "status": 200, "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T18:18:50.184946965Z", "changedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z", "fingerprint": "fb0136facdba" }, { "url": "https://gusto.com/about/terms/developer-terms-of-service", "kind": "terms", "status": 403, "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T18:20:46.783185211Z", "changedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z" } ], "updatedAt": "2026-10-08T22:39:23.856884406Z" } }, "answer": "Gusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.", "b": { "slug": "paychex", "name": "Paychex", "vendor": "Paychex, Inc.", "vendorUrl": "https://www.paychex.com", "kind": "http-api", "category": "payroll", "summary": "Paychex's REST API reads and updates company, worker and pay data in Paychex Flex, a US payroll and HR service. Clients create an app inside their Flex account. Software partners apply to Paychex for a sandbox and production credentials.", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex", "markdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.md", "slimMarkdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.min.md", "jsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json", "license": "Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published", "transports": [ "http" ], "packages": [], "auth": "oauth", "authNotes": "Graded on the Paychex API for Paychex Flex. Access is by OAuth 2.0 client credentials. A key and secret go in the form body of POST `/auth/oauth/v2/token` and return a Bearer token that lasts 60 minutes, with no refresh token. A Paychex client with a Super Admin or Security Admin role creates an app inside Flex and chooses its access levels. A software partner fills in a questionnaire, is reviewed by the Corporate Partnerships Team, builds in a sandbox Paychex issues, demos the integration and then receives a production key and secret limited to the verbs and endpoints requested. Each client approves a partner app in Flex before its data is reachable.", "pricing": "paid", "pricingNotes": "No price is published for the API or for Paychex payroll. The Request Pricing button on paychex.com/payroll leads to the sales contact form, and the developer centre states no fee. The API reaches only companies with a paid Paychex Flex account, and the Payroll API needs online payroll added by a Paychex representative. The partner sandbox is issued after Paychex approves the partnership, so there is no way to start without Paychex's agreement (checked 2026-10-08).", "priceSummary": "Paid", "where": "local", "x402": { "level": "no", "evidence": "No x402, MPP or L402 in the developer centre pages or the OpenAPI definition (checked 2026-10-08).", "endpoints": [] }, "toolCount": null, "popularity": { "githubStars": null, "npmWeekly": null, "pypiWeekly": null, "asOf": "2026-10-08" }, "docsUrl": "https://developer.paychex.com/documentation", "openapi": "https://developer.paychex.com/sites/default/files/apidocument/openapi-merge-develop.210-public.json", "capabilities": [ "payroll.employees", "hr.employees", "hr.onboarding", "hr.documents", "hr.org" ], "tags": [ "hosted", "payroll", "hr", "oauth", "openapi", "partner-approval", "sandbox", "webhooks", "sales-led", "soc2", "iso27001" ], "lastRelease": "2026-08-20", "graded": true, "anchor": { "graded": true, "score": 44.8, "grade": "E", "agentReady": false, "rank": 666, "ranked": true, "rankOf": 722, "categoryRank": 9, "methodology": "0.4", "run": "2026-10-01", "scores": { "ergonomics": 54, "maintenance": 26, "payments": 0, "reliability": 41, "schema": 66, "security": 58, "transparency": 54 }, "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "assessment": { "confidence": "medium", "date": "2026-10-08" }, "negative": 0, "verdict": "A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages.", "bestFor": "A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.", "strengths": [ "One public OpenAPI 3.0.3 file describes 110 operations and 147 schemas, with named request and response examples for most of them", "Checks are created as unprocessed entries. The docs say the client or a Paychex service provider must review and submit the payroll", "A client admin approves each partner app inside Paychex Flex before any company data is reachable, and a delete endpoint removes the link", "Errors return a `code`, `description` and `resolution`, and every response carries an `x-payx-txid` for support", "Published limit of 10,000 requests a minute per partner, with `X-RateLimit-*` headers and `Retry-After` on 429" ], "weaknesses": [ "Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval", "No price is published for the API or for Paychex payroll. The pricing button leads to a sales contact form", "No status page, incident history or SLA was found, and the User Terms of Use give no availability guarantee", "Paging works on three endpoints only, and on the worker list it can't be combined with filters", "No SDK, llms.txt or dated changelog was found. The News page holds two notices", "The User Terms of Use bar automated access to Paychex sites and applications unless Paychex approves it, and allow suspension without notice" ], "agentNotes": [ "POST `grant_type=client_credentials` with the key and secret in the form body to `/auth/oauth/v2/token`. Tokens last 60 minutes and there is no refresh token, so request a new one", "Call GET `/companies` first. Worker and payroll paths need a `companyId` or `workerId` the app has been granted", "Send `offset` and `limit` on GET `/companies/{companyId}/workers`, 50 at most, and resend the `ETag` between pages. The unpaged form is withdrawn on 24 February 2027", "Creating a check doesn't pay anyone. A person must review and submit the payroll in Paychex Flex", "Send a unique `X-payx-client-correlationId` per request and keep the `x-payx-txid` from the response. Support asks for it", "On 423 the client is locked by another user or process. Wait and retry" ], "metrics": { "kind": "remote", "measured": false }, "reviewCount": 0, "avgRating": 0, "history": [ { "basis": "public evidence", "confidence": "medium", "grade": "E", "methodology": "0.4", "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run", "score": 44.8 } ], "editorialScores": { "ergonomics": 54, "maintenance": 26, "payments": 0, "reliability": 41, "schema": 66, "security": 58, "transparency": 39 }, "provenanceScore": 69 }, "connect": { "http": "curl --location 'https://api.paychex.com/auth/oauth/v2/token' \\\n--header 'Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded' \\\n--data-urlencode 'grant_type=client_credentials' \\\n--data-urlencode 'client_id=CLIENT_ID' \\\n--data-urlencode 'client_secret=CLIENT_SECRET'" }, "letme": { "capability": "https://letme.dev/payroll.employees", "tool": "https://letme.dev/paychex" }, "area": "domain-data", "provenance": { "legalEntity": "Paychex, Inc.", "domain": "paychex.com", "domainRegistered": "1991-06-10", "endpointOnVendorDomain": true, "terms": "https://www.paychex.com/corporate/terms", "privacy": "https://www.paychex.com/corporate/security/privacy", "statusPage": "", "changelog": "https://developer.paychex.com/news", "securityTxt": "none", "checked": "2026-10-08", "notes": [ "The privacy policy (last updated 1 June 2026) names Paychex, Inc., 911 Panorama Trail South, Rochester, NY 14625.", "The terms link is the Paychex User Terms of Use, effective 1 June 2026, which govern Paychex's websites, software applications, mobile applications and services. No API-specific terms are published. The partner agreement and the Third-Party Terms of Use a client accepts in Flex weren't found in public.", "API calls go to https://api.paychex.com. An unauthenticated GET `/companies` answered 401 with error code API-103.", "www.paychex.com/.well-known/security.txt, www.paychex.com/security.txt and developer.paychex.com/.well-known/security.txt return 404. Vulnerability reports go through a form at paychex.com/corporate/security/responsible-disclosure run with Bugcrowd.", "No status page was found on the developer centre or the security page, and status.paychex.com didn't resolve.", "The changelog link is the developer centre's News page, which holds two notices and no dated list of changes.", "RDAP for paychex.com gives a registration date of 1991-06-10." ], "score": 69 }, "pageJsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.json" }, "facts": [ { "a": "HTTP API", "b": "HTTP API", "name": "Kind" }, { "a": "Gusto, Inc.", "b": "Paychex, Inc.", "name": "Vendor" }, { "a": "no (local only)", "b": "no (local only)", "name": "Hosted endpoint" }, { "a": "HTTP", "b": "HTTP", "name": "Transports" }, { "a": "OAuth", "b": "OAuth", "name": "Auth" }, { "a": "Paid", "b": "Paid", "name": "Pricing" }, { "a": "no", "b": "no", "name": "x402" }, { "a": "Proprietary service under Gusto's API Policy and Developer Terms of Service. The API clients on GitHub are MIT, and the React SDK and the Gusto CLI are Apache-2.0", "b": "Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published", "name": "Licence" }, { "a": "no", "b": "no", "name": "Read-only variant documented" }, { "a": "yes", "b": "no", "name": "llms.txt" }, { "a": "2026-10-01", "b": "2026-08-20", "name": "Last release" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "no date given", "name": "Terms last updated" }, { "a": "no document linked", "b": "2026-06-01", "name": "Privacy policy last updated" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "yes", "name": "Customer content may train models" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "yes", "name": "Terms restrict automated access" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "not found in the text", "name": "Terms restrict benchmarking" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "yes", "name": "Terms or service can change without notice" }, { "a": "couldn't be read", "b": "yes", "name": "Arbitration or class-action waiver" }, { "a": "2 stars, 25k npm/wk", "b": "none", "name": "Popularity" } ], "faq": [ { "answer": "Gusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.", "question": "Which is better for AI agents, Gusto or Paychex?" }, { "answer": "Both use an OAuth sign-in.", "question": "Do Gusto and Paychex need an API key?" }, { "answer": "No hosted endpoint is listed for Gusto. No hosted endpoint is listed for Paychex.", "question": "Can an agent call Gusto and Paychex without installing anything?" } ], "goodFor": [ { "aheadOn": [ "Reliability, 58 against 41", "Schema \u0026 documentation, 86 against 66", "Agent ergonomics, 82 against 54", "Payments \u0026 pricing, 15 against 0", "Maintenance \u0026 community, 76 against 26", "Transparency \u0026 trust, 61 against 54" ], "also": null, "goodFor": "A software platform that wants to run US payroll for its own customers and can pass Gusto's partner reviews.", "slug": "gusto", "watchFor": "Production keys need commercial, security and implementation reviews with Gusto's partnerships team, and the docs say not all use cases are supported" }, { "aheadOn": null, "also": null, "goodFor": "A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.", "slug": "paychex", "watchFor": "Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval" } ], "job": { "capability": "payroll.employees", "name": "Payroll employees" }, "others": [ { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Argyle vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Argyle vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Check vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Employment Hero Payroll vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Everee vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Finch vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Finch vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa.json", "title": "Paychex vs Salsa", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal.json", "title": "Paychex vs Zeal", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Check vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Employment Hero Payroll vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Everee vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-salsa.json", "title": "Gusto vs Salsa", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-salsa" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-zeal.json", "title": "Gusto vs Zeal", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-zeal" } ], "scores": [ { "by": 17, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 58, "key": "reliability", "name": "Reliability", "paychex": 41, "weight": 16 }, { "key": "performance", "name": "Performance", "pending": true, "weight": 10 }, { "by": 20, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 86, "key": "schema", "name": "Schema \u0026 documentation", "paychex": 66, "weight": 13 }, { "by": 28, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 82, "key": "ergonomics", "name": "Agent ergonomics", "paychex": 54, "weight": 13 }, { "by": 2, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 60, "key": "security", "name": "Security \u0026 auth", "paychex": 58, "weight": 14 }, { "by": 15, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 15, "key": "payments", "name": "Payments \u0026 pricing", "paychex": 0, "weight": 10 }, { "key": "tasks", "name": "Task success", "pending": true, "weight": 10 }, { "by": 50, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 76, "key": "maintenance", "name": "Maintenance \u0026 community", "paychex": 26, "weight": 7 }, { "by": 7, "edge": "gusto", "gusto": 61, "key": "transparency", "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust", "paychex": 54, "weight": 7 } ], "summary": "Gusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees.", "verdicts": { "gusto": "This listing covers the Embedded Payroll API. Every reference page carries an OpenAPI 3.1 definition, payroll is calculated as a preview before submission, and each API version gets 12 months of deprecation support. Production needs commercial and security approval, no price was readable, and the status page lists 11 incidents between 14 July and 5 October 2026, five marked major.", "paychex": "A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages." } }, "kind": "anchor.page", "links": { "api": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json", "html": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex", "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.json", "llms": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt", "markdown": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.md", "slim": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.min.md" }, "markdown": "Gusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees.\n\n- Gusto: grade B, 63.3/100, rank #314 of 722. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gusto.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/gusto.json\n- Paychex: grade E, 44.8/100, rank #666 of 722. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json\n\n## Which one, for what\n\n### Gusto (B)\n\nGood for: A software platform that wants to run US payroll for its own customers and can pass Gusto's partner reviews.\n\nAhead on:\n- Reliability, 58 against 41\n- Schema \u0026 documentation, 86 against 66\n- Agent ergonomics, 82 against 54\n- Payments \u0026 pricing, 15 against 0\n- Maintenance \u0026 community, 76 against 26\n- Transparency \u0026 trust, 61 against 54\n\nWatch for: Production keys need commercial, security and implementation reviews with Gusto's partnerships team, and the docs say not all use cases are supported\n\n### Paychex (E)\n\nGood for: A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.\n\nWatch for: Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval\n\n\n## Score by category\n\n| Category | Weight | Gusto | Paychex | Edge |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 58 | 41 | Gusto +17 |\n| Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |\n| Schema \u0026 documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 86 | 66 | Gusto +20 |\n| Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 82 | 54 | Gusto +28 |\n| Security \u0026 auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 60 | 58 | Gusto +2 |\n| Payments \u0026 pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 15 | 0 | Gusto +15 |\n| Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |\n| Maintenance \u0026 community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 76 | 26 | Gusto +50 |\n| Transparency \u0026 trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 61 | 54 | Gusto +7 |\n| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |\n| **Total** | | **63.3 · B** | **44.8 · E** | |\n\n## Facts side by side\n\n| Fact | Gusto | Paychex |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |\n| Vendor | Gusto, Inc. | Paychex, Inc. |\n| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |\n| Transports | HTTP | HTTP |\n| Auth | OAuth | OAuth |\n| Pricing | Paid | Paid |\n| x402 | no | no |\n| Licence | Proprietary service under Gusto's API Policy and Developer Terms of Service. The API clients on GitHub are MIT, and the React SDK and the Gusto CLI are Apache-2.0 | Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published |\n| Read-only variant documented | no | no |\n| llms.txt | yes | no |\n| Last release | 2026-10-01 | 2026-08-20 |\n| Terms last updated | couldn't be read | no date given |\n| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 2026-06-01 |\n| Customer content may train models | couldn't be read | yes |\n| Terms restrict automated access | couldn't be read | yes |\n| Terms restrict benchmarking | couldn't be read | not found in the text |\n| Terms or service can change without notice | couldn't be read | yes |\n| Arbitration or class-action waiver | couldn't be read | yes |\n| Popularity | 2 stars, 25k npm/wk | none |\n\n## Verdicts\n\n**Gusto.** This listing covers the Embedded Payroll API. Every reference page carries an OpenAPI 3.1 definition, payroll is calculated as a preview before submission, and each API version gets 12 months of deprecation support. Production needs commercial and security approval, no price was readable, and the status page lists 11 incidents between 14 July and 5 October 2026, five marked major.\n\n**Paychex.** A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages.\n\n## Before you call either\n\n### Gusto\n\n1. Develop against https://api.gusto-demo.com. Production at https://api.gusto.com needs keys Gusto issues after its reviews\n2. Send `X-Gusto-API-Version: 2026-06-15` on every call. Without it the application's minimum version applies\n3. Send the resource's current `version` with every PUT, and only the fields to change. A stale version returns 409\n4. Calculate and submit return 202. Poll GET on the payroll until `calculated_at` is set or the status is processed, and read `submission_blockers` first\n5. For a company already on Gusto, the Embedded API is the wrong route. Use the Gusto CLI or the MCP server at https://mcp.api.gusto.com, which draft payroll but can't submit it\n\n### Paychex\n\n1. POST `grant_type=client_credentials` with the key and secret in the form body to `/auth/oauth/v2/token`. Tokens last 60 minutes and there is no refresh token, so request a new one\n2. Call GET `/companies` first. Worker and payroll paths need a `companyId` or `workerId` the app has been granted\n3. Send `offset` and `limit` on GET `/companies/{companyId}/workers`, 50 at most, and resend the `ETag` between pages. The unpaged form is withdrawn on 24 February 2027\n4. Creating a check doesn't pay anyone. A person must review and submit the payroll in Paychex Flex\n5. Send a unique `X-payx-client-correlationId` per request and keep the `x-payx-txid` from the response. Support asks for it\n6. On 423 the client is locked by another user or process. Wait and retry\n\n## Questions\n\n### Which is better for AI agents, Gusto or Paychex?\n\nGusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.\n\n### Do Gusto and Paychex need an API key?\n\nBoth use an OAuth sign-in.\n\n### Can an agent call Gusto and Paychex without installing anything?\n\nNo hosted endpoint is listed for Gusto. No hosted endpoint is listed for Paychex.\n\n\n## For agents\n\n- This comparison as JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.json, and with the fewest tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.min.md\n- Over MCP at https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (no key): `compare_tools {\"a\": \"gusto\", \"b\": \"paychex\"}`. From a terminal: `anchor compare gusto paychex`\n- Each listing in full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/gusto.json and https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json\n\n## Other comparisons with Gusto or Paychex\n\n- [Argyle vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Argyle vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Check vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Employment Hero Payroll vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Everee vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Finch vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Finch vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Paychex vs Salsa](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa.md)\n- [Paychex vs Zeal](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal.md)\n- [Check vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Employment Hero Payroll vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Everee vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Gusto vs Salsa](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-salsa.md)\n- [Gusto vs Zeal](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-zeal.md)\n", "meta": { "attribution": "Anchor Terminal (https://www.anchorterminal.com)", "docs": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/docs/", "generatedAt": "2026-10-08", "license": "CC-BY-4.0", "method": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/", "methodology": "0.4", "openapi": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/openapi.json", "preview": false, "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run" }, "page": { "breadcrumbs": [ { "name": "Home", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/" }, { "name": "Compare", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/" }, { "name": "Gusto vs Paychex", "url": "" } ], "description": "Gusto scores 63.3 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.", "facts": [ "Gusto B 63.3", "Paychex E 44.8", "scores" ], "h1": "Gusto vs Paychex", "image": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/assets/og/compare-gusto-vs-paychex.png", "path": "/compare/gusto-vs-paychex", "published": "2026-10-01", "section": "tools", "title": "Gusto vs Paychex for AI agents, B 63.3 vs E 44.8 | Anchor Terminal", "toc": null, "updated": "2026-10-08", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex" }, "tokens": { "markdown": 2100, "slim": 680 }, "version": 1 }