Copilot vs ChatGPT vs Claude for Business

Copilot vs ChatGPT vs Claude at a glance

If your team already works in Microsoft 365, Copilot is the natural starting point, and it already includes Claude models. The table sets out how the four options compare on the questions executives ask most.

Why Microsoft 365 Copilot suits broad use across an organisation

Rolling AI out to everyone raises two questions: what can it reach, and what could go wrong. Copilot answers both through the permissions your organisation already has. It can open any file a person can already open, with nothing extra to set up, and it has no access beyond what that individual already has. The main exposure is information that has been overshared internally, which a check of SharePoint permissions addresses.

Copilot also gives people a path from personal productivity to organisation-wide value. Anyone can build an agent in Microsoft 365 Copilot, and a proven agent can be copied into Copilot Studio, where it runs on a governed, enterprise-wide platform. That path from an individual's good idea to a supported business tool is one of the main reasons organisations choose Copilot, and it fits the governance model we recommend.

For organisations focused on preventing information leakage, it helps that Copilot runs inside Microsoft's cloud. When Copilot needs something from the internet, it sends a search query through Microsoft's controlled web search.

Copilot is also multi-model. Microsoft uses OpenAI models, Anthropic's Claude models and, increasingly, models it builds itself. Sometimes the model is visible and selectable, and sometimes Copilot chooses. It has been designed for business users first.

The trade-off is pace. Model makers release their models in their own products first, and Microsoft then integrates them into Copilot and updates the surrounding software, so Copilot is rarely the first to a new feature. It is highly capable all the same, and the ability to move work into Copilot Studio appeals to organisations that value control. We explain why we now recommend Microsoft 365 Copilot in more detail elsewhere.

Copilot vs Claude for business: where Claude stands out

Claude is widely used, and a large part of that comes from its harness: the software around the model that plans work, uses tools and checks its own progress. Claude's harness is good at long-running pieces of work. Copilot now has similar capability through Copilot Cowork, which is built with Anthropic's Claude models, so the two experiences are close.

The main difference is where the work can run. Claude's tools can run on a person's own computer, and Claude Code, included in several of Claude's paid plans, is well suited to software development. Hypergen uses it for our own coding and software work.

For an organisation, that local access brings more risk. An AI agent that can read local files and reach the internet can send information outside the organisation by accident, and careful configuration is what prevents it. This is one of the main reasons organisations standardise on Copilot for everyday work and give Claude to the specific people who need it.

Microsoft 365 Copilot vs ChatGPT Enterprise and Claude Enterprise

Both OpenAI and Anthropic offer business and enterprise plans with administrator controls, single sign-on and a commitment not to train on customer business data. Through connectors, both can reach SharePoint, Google Drive and other systems, so you can achieve similar permissions and controls to Copilot, with more setup work involved.

New features also tend to arrive on ChatGPT and Claude sooner, because the vendors ship them in their own products first. For teams that want the newest capability, that can be a real advantage; for most organisations, stability and control carry more weight.

How much does each cost?

For business use, Microsoft 365 Copilot has two parts: a flat per-user Copilot licence, and usage-based Copilot Credits for features that carry out multi-step tasks, such as Copilot Cowork and Copilot Studio agents. Claude still offers individual plans with fixed monthly prices and usage limits, which suit small businesses, while its enterprise pricing now combines seats with usage. ChatGPT offers per-user business plans and enterprise pricing by quote.

In our experience, usage-based costs land in a similar range across Copilot and Claude, although the vendors measure usage differently, so a like-for-like comparison needs a pilot. Prices change often; treat any figure as indicative and confirm current Australian pricing with your provider.

Copilot vs Gemini for Google Workspace

If your organisation runs on Google Workspace, Microsoft 365 Copilot is not a good fit. Gemini for Workspace works with Google Docs, Drive and Gmail in much the same way Copilot works with Microsoft 365 documents, and it is the better starting point for Google organisations.

Should you self-host an AI model?

Open and self-hosted models will attract growing interest, and we want that ecosystem to thrive. Today, the leading open models trail the leading models by several months. You can point an agent harness at a self-hosted model, but matching the capability of the leading models needs the largest open models running on expensive specialist servers.

Saving money is a common reason to self-host. Microsoft 365 Copilot cannot be pointed at a self-hosted model, and cloud services decide which models they run, so the saving rarely applies to everyday office work. Self-hosting suits custom development and specialist workloads, and even for software development the open models currently sit behind the leading ones.

Security is the larger consideration. Open harnesses, and the protected spaces they run in, are less tested than the major platforms, so they need careful evaluation before they touch company information. They also lack the deep access to your content that Microsoft provides through SharePoint and Work IQ (Microsoft's layer that connects Copilot to your work information), which an organisation would need to rebuild. We expect a sizeable ecosystem of alternatives to Microsoft 365 and Google to emerge. For now, it is one to watch.

Where your files live decides more than the model

The model itself is becoming less of a differentiator. What decides usefulness is proximity to your information. Proximity here is about access, not speed: the assistant needs to sit inside the applications people use every day and reach the documents and images they work with. Today, Copilot wins that test for Microsoft 365 organisations and Gemini wins it for Google ones.

Choose the assistant most closely aligned to your existing investments, or, if you are on neither suite, consider moving to Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace before choosing an AI platform.

How to decide

Most organisations care about security and the privacy of their information. If you already have Microsoft 365, adding Copilot is close to a no-brainer and a sound starting point. From there, add other services case by case: specialist video or advanced image generation for the individuals who need it, or custom development where you want flexibility over the model.

Custom development gives you that flexibility. A business replacing its CRM with a custom build, for example, can make it intelligent: drag in an email signature and the AI adds the contact automatically. Our AI agent development and Hypergen Rails work covers this, and our view on build versus buy explains when it pays. As your needs grow, the options widen with them.

Hypergen typically works with organisations of around 30 people or more, which is where a broader adoption plan becomes worthwhile. That plan usually starts with Microsoft 365 Copilot training and continues through a Copilot adoption programme, and for larger organisations an enterprise Copilot rollout. For how Copilot handles sensitive information, see our FAQ on Copilot and confidential information.

Frequently asked questions