CREAO AI
Build AI agents by chatting, then schedule them to run your recurring work unattended.
Who CREAO AI is best for
- Solo operators who want recurring work handled without building a Zapier graph
- Teams that need an agent to read a real browser session behind a login
- Anyone who would rather describe a workflow in chat than wire nodes
Ideal team: Solopreneurs and teams of 1-10 with recurring knowledge work (quotes, reports, briefs, scans) who want an agent to do it on a schedule, and who can tolerate a young product with almost no third-party review history.
CREAO AI pricing
Free
$0
- 30 one-time credits, plus 5 a day
- 1 personal connector per agent app
- Community support
Pro
$20/flat / mo
- 200 credits / mo ($16 billed annually)
- Hand-pick a specific model
- Custom agents and all connectors
Pro Plus
$50/flat / mo
- 600 credits / mo ($40 billed annually)
- Scheduled runs unlock here
- Priority support
Max
$150/flat / mo
- 2,000 credits / mo ($120 billed annually)
- Dedicated support
- Everything in Pro Plus
Costs to watch before you commit
- Everything is metered in credits, and the rate swings about 400x by model: the docs put economy models at ~0.1-1 credit a message and premium ones at ~5-40, so Pro's 200 credits is either a month of work or roughly five messages
- Scheduled runs, the feature the homepage is built around, need Pro Plus at $50/mo or higher, and each scheduled run spends credits like a manual one
- Running out mid-month means buying credit packs at $0.15 each, so a single premium message can cost up to $6
- A fifth plan, Ultra at $1,000/mo for 20,000 credits, exists in the docs but is not shown on the pricing page
- Browser automation runs on a third party (Browser Use Cloud) whose privacy policy, per CREAO's own docs, permits training on submitted page content with no opt-out described
CREAO AI pros and cons
Pros
- The core idea is sound and it is not a chat wrapper: each thread gets a real Linux sandbox, and a successful session can be saved as an agent that reruns on a schedule
- Model choice is genuinely broad, with Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Meta, MiniMax, Z.ai, Moonshot and Sakana models in one picker, and you pick per thread
- The free tier is usable rather than decorative: 30 credits to start plus 5 more every day, no card required
- Connectors are official MCP integrations to Gmail, Calendar, Sheets, Slack, Notion, Shopify, GitHub and about thirty more, so the plumbing is not screen scraping
- Approval gates are on by default, and anything write or destructive pauses for sign-off until you flip it to full auto
- The documentation is unusually candid, and it is where the browser feature's third-party training disclosure appears at all
- Annual billing is a real 20 percent cut across every paid plan, not a token discount
- The privacy policy commits in plain words that conversations, files and integration data are not used to train generalized models
Cons
- The agreement you accept has no fees, payments or subscriptions section at all, despite referring to one twice by number
- The word credits never appears in that agreement, so nothing contractual governs rollover, expiry or what a credit is worth
- The Terms grant a license to use your content to improve their AI models, which is not what the privacy policy tells you
- Credit cost swings roughly 400x by model, so a plan's monthly allowance is not a number you can plan against
- Scheduled runs, which the entire homepage is built around, are locked to Pro Plus at $50 a month
- Browser automation routes pages behind your login through a third party whose policy permits training on them with no opt-out
- 13 Product Hunt reviews is the only third-party sample that exists anywhere, and it is a launch audience, not buyers
- The ROI figures on the homepage are an illustrative model, and the 95 percent quality figure is the vendor scoring itself
- Disputes go to negotiation, then mediation, then HKIAC arbitration in Hong Kong with costs shared, which is not a remedy a $20-a-month customer can use
CREAO AI review: a closer look
The contract has no payments section
Open the Terms linked in CREAO's footer, the Marketplace Service Agreement dated 9 July 2026, and read the section headings. There are seven: Introduction, Definitions, User Conduct, Intellectual Property, Disclaimer and Limitation of Liability, Termination and Suspension, and General Provisions. Now search it for the section that governs what you pay. Two separate clauses, the definition of a Commercially Shared Application and the sharing rules in 3.4.1, both point you to "Section 7 (Fees, Payments, and Subscriptions)." Section 7 is General Provisions. There is no fees section in the document. The consequences are not academic. The word refund appears exactly once in the whole agreement, and it is in a sentence about other developers setting refund policies for apps they sell to you. There is no auto-renewal clause, no cancellation terms, no statement of what happens to a paid month if you downgrade. And the word credits, the unit that meters every single thing this product does, appears zero times. Section 2.8 hands the whole subject off to the pricing page and to a "Subscription Plan Policy accessible within the Platform's mobile mobile software application as available through the Apple App Store," typo included, which is a strange place to keep the commercial terms of a browser product. None of this means CREAO will refuse you a refund. It means the document you accept does not say it will give you one, and if that matters to you it is a two-minute check you should do yourself before paying.
Two documents, two answers on training
The privacy policy is direct and reassuring: "The Company does not use Integration Data, conversations, files, or other User Content to create, train, fine-tune, validate, or improve generalized AI or machine learning models." It is one of the clearest statements of its kind we have read on a site this small. Then read section 3.5.3 of the Terms, which grants CREAO a worldwide, sublicensable, transferable license to "use your User Content to develop, test, and improve the Platform's AI models, algorithms, and functionality, provided that such use is anonymized and does not identify you personally," and which survives the termination of your account unless you specifically request deletion. Both documents are binding, and the privacy policy says so explicitly, calling itself an integral part of the agreement. The word doing the reconciling is generalized. A reader can construct a reading in which the privacy policy rules out training foundation models while the Terms permit improving CREAO's own systems, and that reading is probably what was intended. But a buyer who reads only one of the two documents walks away with a different answer about their data than a buyer who reads the other, and on a platform you connect to Gmail and Slack that is a gap worth having closed before you connect anything.
What a credit actually buys
Every plan is denominated in credits and the documentation is refreshingly specific about the exchange rate, which is what makes the problem visible. Models sit in three cost tiers: economy at roughly 0.1 to 1 credit per message, standard at roughly 1 to 6, and premium at roughly 5 to 40. That is a spread of about 400 times between the cheapest message and the most expensive one. Pro at $20 a month gives you 200 credits. Run it on GLM 5.3 Flash and 200 credits is a month of steady work. Run it on Claude Opus 5 or GPT-6 Astra, the models the homepage puts front and center, and 200 credits could be five messages. Not five tasks, five messages, and an agent working through a multi-step job sends many. Two more things follow from this. Credit packs are $0.15 each, so a single premium message can cost up to $6 if you are topping up. And scheduled runs, the feature the entire homepage is built around, spend credits exactly like manual ones while being locked to Pro Plus at $50 a month, so the plan that lets you run agents unattended is the one where unattended agents can quietly spend your month. Budget on the model you actually intend to use, not on the headline price.
The browser feature is the one to think hardest about
Browser Use lets an agent act on websites as the signed-in you. You log in yourself inside a live browser, the session is saved to a profile, and from then on runs start authenticated. The design is careful in the ways that matter most: you type your password into the site, not into the agent, CREAO stores only a reference to the profile rather than your cookies, and irreversible actions like posting or sending pause for confirmation. Then their documentation says this, in their own words, about the provider that actually runs it: "The provider's public privacy policy permits it to use content submitted to its agent to train or improve its models, and it describes no opt-out." That provider is Browser Use Cloud, and the content in question is every page the browser visits during a run, explicitly including pages behind your login. Their docs even tell you how to think about it, advising you to use browser runs only on accounts you are comfortable sharing with the provider on those terms. Disclosing this at all is to CREAO's credit and most vendors would have left it out. It still means your LinkedIn inbox or your admin dashboard is being handed to a fourth party. Two smaller notes. The runs use stealth rendering and residential proxies, and logging into a service on your behalf through those is the kind of thing that can breach that service's own terms, which is your exposure and not CREAO's. And the homepage advertises "automatic CAPTCHA solving" while the documentation describes you completing human checks yourself in the live browser, so calibrate to the docs.
There is almost no outside evidence, and the numbers on the homepage are models
CREAO launched on Product Hunt in September 2025 and holds 4.5 stars there across 13 reviews. That is the entire third-party evidence base. It has a G2 listing that G2 itself annotates as having too few reviews to provide buying insight, zero reviews on SourceForge, and no Capterra or Trustpilot presence at all. Thirteen reviews from a launch-day audience is not a buyer sample, and the reviews themselves read that way: the praise is for the concept, and the recurring criticism is that reviewers want proof the experience holds up for non-technical users in real multi-turn work. That is a fair thing to still be asking about a product this young, and it is also the exact question a buyer needs answered. Against that thin base, read the homepage numbers carefully. The dashboard block showing 200 hours saved, a $1 to $30 return and $180,000 returned on $6,000 spent carries a line of fine print underneath: "Illustrative model based on aggregate CREAO platform data, assuming a $75 per hour blended rate across 10 teammates." It is a spreadsheet, not a measurement, and it says so. The "95%+ high-quality responses" claim is aggregate metrics from runs the platform scored itself. Neither is dishonest, both are labeled, and neither is evidence.
How it compares
In our own automation catalog the closest peers are Bardeen at 4.8 across 35 reviews from $10 a month, Gumloop at 4.8 across 6 from $30, and Activepieces at 4.8 across 142 from $5, with Latenode at 4.9 across 68 for teams that want code. Activepieces is the useful anchor: at 142 reviews it is the only one of the group with a sample approaching the 150 we treat as enough to draw conclusions from, and it is open source, so what you connect stays somewhere you control. CREAO's 13 sits at the bottom of that peer group. On capability the comparison genuinely favors CREAO in places, because none of those peers give you a persistent Linux sandbox, a model picker spanning eight providers, and an authenticated browser in one product. If you want a schedule-and-forget agent rather than a trigger-and-action graph, CREAO is doing something Zapier and Make are not really trying to do. The honest summary is that you are paying a young Hong Kong company with 13 public reviews for a more ambitious product, against established tools with more evidence and less reach. That can be a reasonable trade. It is not a trade to make with data you cannot afford to expose.
Who should use CREAO AI?
A good fit
CREAO fits a solopreneur, freelancer or small agency with genuinely recurring knowledge work, the daily competitor scan, the weekly client report, the inbound quote that always needs the same three lookups, who has tried to build it in Zapier and found the graph does not survive contact with a task that needs judgment. The chat-to-agent-to-schedule path is real and the sandbox behind it is real. The way in costs nothing: the free tier gives 30 credits plus 5 a day with no card, which is enough to find out whether the agent handles your actual work or falls apart on the third step. Do that before paying for anything. If it works, the plan to buy is Pro Plus at $50, because Pro at $20 cannot run anything on a schedule and scheduling is the entire point. Pin your agents to an economy or standard model and treat the premium ones as something you reach for deliberately.
Look elsewhere if…
Look elsewhere if the work involves client data, regulated data, or anything you would need a real contract behind, because there is no fees or refunds section in the agreement, no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 claim anywhere on the site, and the dispute path runs through arbitration in Hong Kong with costs shared, which no small customer will ever use. Look elsewhere if you need the browser feature but cannot accept a third party processing and potentially training on pages behind your login, which is CREAO's own disclosure and not an inference. Look elsewhere if you want to buy on evidence, where Activepieces at 142 reviews or Bardeen at 35 give you something to read that 13 launch reviews do not. And look elsewhere if your automations are deterministic, where a trigger fires and three known things must happen, because that is Zapier and Make's job and an LLM agent is a slower, dearer and less predictable way to do it.
The verdict
CREAO is the most interesting product we have added to the automation catalog in a while, and the least evidenced. The concept is not vaporware: chat until the work is right, save the session as an agent, put it on a schedule, and let it reach into Gmail or Shopify or a real logged-in browser while you sleep. The sandbox is real, the model picker is unusually broad, the free tier is genuinely usable, and the documentation is more candid than the marketing, which is the right way around. The problems are all in the paperwork and the arithmetic. The agreement you accept refers twice to a fees and payments section that does not exist in the document, never once uses the word credits despite metering everything in them, and says nothing about refunds. The Terms license your content to improve their AI models while the privacy policy says your content is not used for training, and both are binding. The credit rate varies about 400 times between the cheapest and most expensive model, so no plan's allowance means anything until you fix the model. And 13 Product Hunt reviews is not a basis on which to connect your inbox to a company you had not heard of last week. Start on the free tier, which costs nothing and answers the only question that matters. If it earns a place, buy Pro Plus, keep it away from anything you could not afford to have leaked, and treat the homepage's $180,000 return for what its own fine print says it is, which is a model.
Top CREAO AI alternatives
Popular Automation & iPaaS tools teams evaluate alongside CREAO AI.
OttoKit (SureTriggers)All-in-one automation connecting WordPress and 1,000+ apps.
Relay.appSHUTTING DOWN: Relay.app closes on 14 September 2026 for paying customers, and new signups are already disabled.
LatenodeLow-code automation with full code and AI: pay for runtime, not per task.
ParabolaTurn messy data into automated workflows, no code required.
ParseurAI-powered data extraction from emails, PDFs, and documents