You spent $50,000 on Automation Anywhere licenses last year. You spent another $170,000 on consultants. Now your team spends more time fixing broken bots than building new ones. That's not a bug. That's the business model of RPA dying in real time.
The Math That Should Make You Angry
Here's the number that makes me want to scream at VCs who still fund RPA companies. For every $1 you spend on RPA licensing, you spend $3.41 to $4.00 on consulting and maintenance. That's your total cost of ownership. Licensing is only 20 to 25 percent of the picture. The other 75 to 80 percent is just keeping dead code alive. That's insane. It's worse than leasing a car and paying more for repairs than the monthly payment. And it gets worse every year as software updates break your hard-coded selectors.
The Real Killer Stat You Won't Find in Marketing Materials
- Maintenance tickets for bot failures now exceed new automation requests at many enterprises
- 30 to 50 percent of RPA projects fail to scale beyond pilot phase
- Over 40 percent of agentic AI projects get canceled anyway, but at least they cost less upfront
- Your team is firefighting instead of building value
Your bot broke. Again. And you don't even know why because nobody on your team understands the legacy codebase anymore. This is the reality of RPA. Your IT department is running a graveyard of dead bots, and they're charging you by the hour to keep them plugged in.
Why AI Agents Actually Work (And RPA Doesn't)
RPA relies on hard-coded selectors. When a UI updates, the bot fails. When a developer leaves, the bot becomes a nightmare. AI agents use computer vision and LLM reasoning to adapt to interface changes. They see the screen, understand the context, and figure out what to do. They don't need you to maintain selectors. They don't need you to rewrite code when the software changes. They just work. This is why maintenance tickets for bot failures now exceed new automation requests. Your bots are fragile relics in a world of dynamic software.
The Benchmark That Proves The Gap
Look at OSWorld, the gold standard for computer use agents. Claude Computer Use scores 72.5 percent on the official leaderboard. OpenAI's CUA scores 38.1 percent. Meanwhile, Coasty hits 82.81 percent independently verified on the official OSWorld Verified leaderboard. That's not a small gap. That's a massive difference. Coasty's in-house model even achieves 85.6 percent on OSWorld with public results. Nobody else is close. This isn't hype. This is actual performance on real desktop environments, real browsers, real terminals. The gap between RPA and AI computer use agents isn't closing. It's exploding.
Why Coasty Exists (And Why It's Different)
Coasty.ai is the #1 computer use agent because it actually works on real software. It controls desktops, browsers, and terminals. Not just API calls. Not just simulated environments. Real software, real workflows, real results. You can run it locally as a desktop app or in cloud VMs. You can even deploy agent swarms for parallel execution. It has a free tier. It supports BYOK. It's built for actual use cases, not for PowerPoint slides at conferences. When you compare Coasty to Automation Anywhere, you're not comparing two tools. You're comparing a graveyard maintenance service to a living, breathing AI agent that actually gets work done.
The Competitors You Should Be Worried About
- OpenAI Operator is stuck at 38.1 percent on OSWorld
- Anthropic Computer Use can barely break 73 percent
- Automation Anywhere's market share is declining while AI agents are surging
- Your competitors are already using AI computer use agents and leaving you behind
You have two choices. Double down on RPA and spend more money fixing broken bots, or switch to an AI computer use agent like Coasty and actually get work done. The choice is yours. But if you're still paying someone to copy-paste data in 2026, you're not just inefficient. You're embarrassing yourself. Go to coasty.ai right now and see what real automation looks like. Your IT department will thank you. Your budget will thank you. And you'll stop spending your life fixing broken bots.
Want to see this in action?
View Case Studies