Caddi and UiPath both automate repetitive work, but take opposite approaches. UiPath is classic RPA: developer-built bots that replay clicks on screen. Caddi is AI-native: you record a workflow once and Caddi writes, runs, and maintains it as code over APIs. UiPath suits IT-led enterprise programs; Caddi suits ops teams in law and finance that want automations live in days.
The basics
What is UiPath?
Enterprise software where developers build bots that click through apps on screen like a person would.
What is Caddi?
The deterministic AI automation platform for ops and admin teams. Ops teams teach Caddi their workflows over a screen share, and then Caddi runs them reliably hundreds of times a week.
The fundamental difference
UiPath automations imitate a human using the screen, moving the mouse, clicking buttons, typing into fields. That works until the interface changes, a page loads slowly, or a layout shifts, at which point the bot silently fails. Caddi uses the recording only to understand the task, then executes through APIs as deterministic code, so runs stay predictable and auditable.
What it takes to stand one up
The classic RPA lifecycle and the Caddi lifecycle look nothing alike. Toggle between the two to compare who builds it, how it runs, and who keeps it alive.
- 1Record the task on a screen-shareA non-technical teammate walks through the workflow once, no developer queue.
- 2Caddi writes deterministic code over APIsNo screen-scraping. Runs go through APIs, so they survive UI changes.
- 3Documents are read nativelyVaried PDFs and shared inboxes are handled out of the box, no OCR template wrangling.
- 4Caddi maintains itUpkeep and edge cases are handled for you, often with automations live in days.
Caddi vs. UiPath at a glance
| UiPath | Caddi | |
|---|---|---|
| Approach | Screen-scraping RPA bots | AI-native, record-to-code |
| How it's built | RPA developers script selectors | Record the task once on a screen-share |
| Production runtime | Replays UI clicks | Deterministic code over APIs |
| UI changes | Bots break | Unaffected (API-driven) |
| Documents & email | OCR templates / IQ-style add-ons | Native reading of varied PDFs & inboxes |
| Who owns it | RPA dev / center of excellence | Non-technical ops staff |
| Maintenance | Internal, ongoing | Built & maintained by Caddi |
| Best fit | Horizontal, IT-led enterprise RPA | Law & finance back office |
How they score where it counts
UiPath is a mature, broad enterprise platform with deep reach across legacy desktop systems. Caddi trades that breadth for resilience, native document handling, and a done-for-you model built for regulated ops.
When UiPath is the right call
UiPath is a strong fit if you run a centralized, IT-governed automation program with RPA developers on staff, need to automate a very broad range of desktop and legacy systems across many departments, and have the budget and team to maintain a bot estate over time.
When Caddi is the right call
Caddi is the better fit if the people who own the process are non-technical, if your highest-value work is document- and inbox-heavy (intake, filing, PDF → system of record, triage), if you need automations live in days rather than a quarter, and if reliability, SOC 2 compliance, and audit trails are non-negotiable.
Which fits your situation?
Caddi
Caddi runs over APIs as deterministic code, so it isn't affected by UI changes that break screen-scraping bots.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between Caddi and UiPath?
UiPath is classic RPA: developers build bots that replay clicks and keystrokes on the screen, which breaks when a UI changes. Caddi is AI-native: you record a workflow once, Caddi writes it as deterministic code that runs over APIs, and Caddi maintains it for you. UiPath is built for IT-led enterprise RPA; Caddi is built for non-technical ops teams in law and finance.
Is Caddi a good UiPath replacement?
Yes, especially for document- and inbox-heavy back-office work. Teams frequently adopt Caddi to replace brittle UiPath bots that require a dedicated RPA developer to maintain. Because Caddi runs on APIs and is maintained for you, it removes both the build burden and the ongoing upkeep that classic RPA carries.
Does Caddi require developers like UiPath?
No. UiPath typically needs RPA developers or a center of excellence. With Caddi, a non-technical staff member records the task on a screen-share and Caddi builds the automation, so paralegals, ops admins, and billing coordinators can own automations without writing code.
When should I use UiPath instead of Caddi?
UiPath can be the right choice if you run a centralized, IT-governed RPA program with developers on staff and need to automate a very broad range of desktop and legacy systems across many departments. Caddi is the better fit for regulated back-office automation owned by the business team.
See Caddi next to your UiPath workflows
Bring a workflow you automate in UiPath today. Caddi will build it from a screen recording and run it across 70+ tools. See real examples or book a demo. For the broader landscape, see our UiPath alternatives guide.
Do more with less
See Caddi in action
Tell us where to reach you and the calendar opens right here. In 30 minutes we'll show you how Caddi automates the back-office work that grows with your clients—built, run, and maintained for you.