Skip to main content
World Wide TechnologyBenchAI tool benchmarks
Autonomous Agent
StatusEmerging
SignalTracked
EvidenceGrade B

UiPath

60
C+ 0 vs last quarter

Enterprise RPA leader crossing the bar from RPA to agentic platform, with the strongest compliance posture on the radar.

UX / DXCapabilityReliabilityValueCommunityEnterpriseAutonomyIntegration

Dimension breakdown

Score · confidence
UX / DX
50% conf60
Capability
50% conf40
ReliabilityIncomplete data at this time
Value
50% conf70
CommunityIncomplete data at this time
Enterprise / Compliance
50% conf90
Autonomy
50% conf40
Integration
50% conf60
Sources blend review platforms, community sentiment, the Signal Radar and practitioner ratings. Scores re-blend each quarter.

Enterprise RPA leader crossing the bar from RPA to agentic platform, with the strongest compliance posture on the radar. May 12, 2026: UiPath for Coding Agents GA — first business orchestration platform to make any coding agent enterprise-deployable, now spanning Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Google Gemini CLI, and Cursor; governance (policy, audit trails, credential vaults, RBAC, runtime controls) applies to every automation whether human- or agent-authored, with no vendor lock-in.

Maestro (BPMN/DMN orchestration with synthetic production-failure testing) GA. Compliance stack: AIUC-1 (industry-first, Schellman-audited Mar 9), ISO/IEC 42001:2023, SOC 1/SOC 2 Type II, FedRAMP Moderate, HIPAA, HITRUST; self-hosted Automation Suite runs fully within agency data centers (AWS/Azure/OpenShift) with self-hosted LLMs. Financials strengthened: Q1 FY2027 (ended Apr 30, 2026) beat with revenue $418M (+17% YoY), ARR $1.901B (+12%), and first-ever Q1 GAAP profitability; FY2027 guide raised to ~$1.78B revenue / ~$430M non-GAAP operating income; acquired WorkFusion (Feb 2026) to deepen financial-crime-compliance agents.

Note

65 @uipath npm packages were hit May 11-12, 2026 by the TeamPCP Mini Shai-Hulud worm (same campaign as TanStack/Mistral/Guardrails AI/160+ packages), but the payload was bugged and non-functional in the @uipath packages, the platform runtime was never affected, and UiPath/GitLab advisories plus remediation guidance are published — customers consuming UiPath npm packages should still audit lockfiles, rotate CI/CD and cloud credentials, and remove any persistence daemon.

Caveats: Agentic Automation mindshare slid 28.9%→20.5% YoY (PeerSpot, #2 in category), analysts hold a neutral/Hold consensus (median target ~$13.44) noting the AI story has not yet translated into faster growth, and Platform Units consumption-based pricing draws bill-shock complaints from heavy-integration buyers. Best fit for regulated enterprises automating business processes that can now also govern AI-generated code; coding-agent capability still relies on external IDEs/agents rather than UiPath's own developer-first interface.

Recommended

Use cases

Not yet assessed — this section fills in as ACES research covers the tool.

Score caps

Risk flags

No active caps — no risk flags apply to this tool right now.

Assessment

Status rationale

Tracked because UiPath has graduated from RPA-only into a meaningful agentic platform: UiPath for Coding Agents GA (May 12, 2026, first business orchestration platform to make any coding agent enterprise-deployable; Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, and Cursor supported, governance-by-default, no lock-in), Maestro orchestration GA (synthetic production-failure testing, human-in-the-loop), government Automation Suite agentic AI with self-hosted LLMs, industry-first AIUC-1 plus ISO/IEC 42001 and FedRAMP Moderate compliance stack, and — as of Q1 FY2027 — first-ever GAAP-profitable first quarter on +17% revenue growth. However, UiPath remains primarily a business process automation platform: coding-agent capability is delivered by integrating with external agents (Claude Code/Codex/Gemini CLI/Cursor) rather than UiPath's own developer-first interface, and there are still no independent agentic coding benchmarks (vendor 95%+ accuracy claims unvalidated).

Competitive mindshare continues to erode (28.9% → 20.5% YoY in PeerSpot's Agentic Automation category, though UiPath holds #2 and remains analyst-ranked #1 on Everest/IDC with Gartner Peer Insights Customers' Choice 2026). Analyst consensus is Hold/neutral.

The May 2026 @uipath npm namespace compromise was a notable developer-facing ecosystem event but carried a non-functional payload and never reached the platform runtime. Holds at Tracked: research-based monitoring with strong and strengthening capability/financial signals, awaiting hands-on validation or independent benchmark data to elevate to Assessed.

Watch for

Movement triggers

Upgrade to Assessed if: hands-on evaluation of UiPath for Coding Agents (any of Claude Code / Codex / Gemini CLI / Cursor paths) is completed with documented findings; OR independent agentic coding benchmarks (SWE-bench, joint UiPath/OpenAI computer-use benchmark results) published with credible scores; OR named enterprise reference for coded-agent production deployment. Upgrade autonomy to 13-14 if: documented reliability data on Maestro-orchestrated agentic workflows in regulated production; OR independent benchmark places UiPath agentic flows competitively (would also remove the latent unvalidated-benchmarks ceiling).

Upgrade viability toward 15-16 if: Q2/Q3 FY2027 sustains 15%+ revenue growth AND mindshare stabilizes AND analyst consensus shifts off Hold. Downgrade viability if: Q2 FY2027 (next report, ~Aug 2026) misses the raised guidance; mindshare decline accelerates below 15%; net retention falls below 105%. Downgrade compliance if: a platform-runtime CVE surfaces; OR the AIUC-1/FedRAMP/ISO 42001 posture lapses.

Status to Detected if: stalled coded-agent adoption, security incident escalates to the platform runtime, or growth decelerates below 5%.

Caution

Risks & limitations

Not yet assessed — this section fills in as ACES research covers the tool.

Capabilities

Integration surface

Not yet assessed — this section fills in as ACES research covers the tool.

Proof points

Adoption & benchmarks

Not yet assessed — this section fills in as ACES research covers the tool.

Spotted something wrong or missing here? Suggest a change →

Per-source contributions

Click any dimension to see the underlying sources and citations.