IFTTT and Gravity get compared mostly because IFTTT was, for a generation of automators, the entry-level idea of "let one app talk to another." If the same buyer evaluates Gravity today, the question is whether AI changes that idea enough to switch.

I'm Aryan, founder of Gravity. I have used IFTTT since 2013 for personal applets and still keep three running. The honest answer to "Gravity vs IFTTT" is "they do different jobs" once you look past the shared lineage.

Why I'm writing this comparison

The reason IFTTT survives is that consumer trigger automation is real work. "If a new song hits this Spotify playlist, save it to my library" is a real ask. The reason Gravity exists is that business outcome automation is also real work, and it is bigger than one-trigger-one-action. This post is the line between the two.

What IFTTT does

IFTTT (If This Then That) is a consumer automation platform launched in 2010. The unit is the "applet," which has one trigger and one action. The product owns the consumer space, especially for smart-home devices, social media glue, and small productivity helpers.

Where IFTTT shines:

IFTTT does the consumer category well. It is not trying to be Zapier, Make, or an agent runtime, and the product is better for the focus.

What Gravity does differently

Gravity does not do single-trigger-single-action. It runs a goal. The runtime decides which steps to take, in what order, with what fallbacks, given a single sentence describing the outcome.

"Every weekday morning, summarise yesterday's Stripe revenue, compare to last week's average, and post a one-paragraph board update to my Slack #board channel."

That is four actions (read, compute, compare, post) in one sentence. IFTTT would need at least three applets, and the comparison step is not natively supported. Gravity treats the whole sentence as the unit. See describe outcome, not workflow and the agent vs workflow distinction.

Side-by-side capability comparison

CapabilityIFTTTGravity
Unit of automationSingle trigger to single actionGoal-shaped outcome sentence
Primary buyerConsumer, hobbyistFounder, operator, small business
AI in the runtimeAI actions, not AI runtimeAI-native runtime
Integration catalogue900+ services, consumer-heavySaaS-first, expanding
Multi-step logicLimited, applet chainsNative, runtime decides
Approval gatesNo native supportOne phrase in the sentence
PricingFree plus Pro/Pro+Bundled monthly

The category split

IFTTT is consumer trigger automation. Gravity is business agent runtime. The categories barely touch, and the products differ by an order of magnitude in the unit of work they handle.

The comparison is interesting only when an IFTTT power user starts hitting the limits of one-trigger-one-action and asks whether AI changes the equation. The answer is usually yes, for the kinds of work that needed more than a single applet anyway.

Pricing reality

IFTTT is the cheaper product at the consumer end. Gravity's bundle is shaped for business outcomes, not single applets. A consumer applet on Gravity would be over-priced; a business outcome on IFTTT would be impossible.

A 60-second decision framework

  1. Is this for personal or business use? Personal leans IFTTT. Business leans Gravity.
  2. Is the unit one trigger and one action? Yes, IFTTT is enough. No, Gravity is the better fit.
  3. Does the work need the AI to think, not just react? Yes leans Gravity. No, IFTTT.
  4. Is the integration in IFTTT's consumer catalogue? Yes makes IFTTT easier. SaaS-first business tools lean Gravity.

When IFTTT is the right choice

When Gravity is the right choice

Example: same outcome, two products

Take "every Monday at 9am, pull last week's invoices that have not been paid, draft a polite chase email per customer in their tone, and queue for me to send."

On IFTTT, this is not really doable. There is no native "pull last week's data," no native drafting per recipient, no native queue for review. You can rig the trigger, but the work falls outside the applet model. On Gravity, that exact sentence is the agent. The runtime handles the data fetch, the per-customer drafting, and the approval gate.

The example is unfair to IFTTT, because the example is a business outcome that IFTTT was never designed to do. The reason it is here is that buyers do still ask "can IFTTT do this?" The honest answer is "not really, and that is fine because IFTTT does other things very well."

Common mistakes buyers make

  1. Stretching IFTTT past its design. Chaining applets to fake multi-step logic works for a while, then breaks in ways that are hard to debug. Use the right tool for the shape of work.
  2. Buying a runtime when an applet is enough. If the job is "when this happens, do that," an agent runtime is over-engineering.
  3. Ignoring failure modes. IFTTT applets fail quietly sometimes. Agent runtimes log and retry. If reliability matters, that is a real difference.

Frequently asked questions

What is IFTTT?

IFTTT (If This Then That) is one of the original consumer automation platforms. Users create applets that follow a single trigger to a single action across consumer apps, smart devices, and a few business tools.

Is IFTTT still relevant in 2026?

For consumer and smart-home use cases yes. For business workflow with AI in the loop the centre of gravity has moved to platforms like Zapier, Make, and more recently agent runtimes.

How is Gravity different from IFTTT?

IFTTT runs one trigger to one action with no AI in the runtime. Gravity is an autonomous agent that decides what to do given an outcome sentence, and can chain many actions.

Can IFTTT do AI now?

IFTTT has added some AI actions, but the model is still "AI as a step," not "AI as the runtime." The applet structure stays one-trigger-one-action.

Should I switch from IFTTT to Gravity?

If your applets are consumer or smart-home, no. If you have business applets where you wish the AI could think for itself, yes.

Three takeaways before you close this tab

  1. Different worlds. Consumer triggers vs business outcomes. The Venn diagram barely overlaps.
  2. Unit of work. One trigger to one action vs one sentence to a multi-step outcome.
  3. Pricing serves the category. Both are priced for who they are. Don't fight it.

Sources