- What AI tokens actually cost: A business benchmark
- The spend distribution: Median vs. average
- Per-employee-per-month (PEPM): The right unit for benchmarking
- What drives AI token spend up
- What drives AI token spend down
- What is your business actually spending on AI?
AI token costs for businesses ranged from a few hundred dollars to hundreds of thousands per month in April 2026, depending on company size, model selection, and how many workflows run on AI. The median monthly spend was $2,246. The average monthly spend was $140,842. That gap reflects how AI spend actually distributes: most companies are in early or moderate adoption, but a single team or automated workflow running unchecked can move you from the median into the average range.
Ramp processes AI vendor payments on behalf of thousands of businesses, giving us direct visibility into what companies actually paid to Anthropic, OpenAI, and other providers. Unlike most benchmarks, which are built from vendor pricing pages, the figures below reflect observed effective rates from our most recent data, across real usage patterns, model mixes, and volume.
Per-employee-per-month (PEPM) AI spend is the most useful benchmark for budgeting and comparison. That range spans a 20× cost difference: the cheapest model (GPT-5-nano) runs $0.07 per million tokens, while GPT-5.5 costs $1.42. Model selection is now one of the biggest procurement decisions you'll make.
What AI tokens actually cost: A business benchmark
Every time an AI model processes a request and generates a response—a query to ChatGPT, a Claude task, an automated workflow step—that's inference. Inference is what you're paying for, and it's billed in tokens.
What you pay depends on two things: which model handled the request, and how much it generated. Providers charge separately for input (what you send) and output (what the model returns). Output costs 3–5× more because it takes more computation to produce.
The bigger variable is model tier: lightweight models are fast and cheap. Premium models are the most capable and most expensive.
Across the businesses Ramp tracks, token costs in April 2026 averaged $0.72 per million tokens (weighted average across model tiers and usage patterns). But that average obscures the real range:
| Model | Ramp observed cost per million tokens (April 2026)† |
|---|---|
| GPT-5-nano (OpenAI) | $0.07 |
| Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic) | $0.40 |
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) | $0.62 |
| Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) | $1.00 |
| GPT-5.5 (OpenAI) | $1.42 |
| GPT-4o (OpenAI) | $2.31 |
†Ramp-observed effective rates: what businesses actually paid across a typical mix of input and output tokens, including caching benefits. Effective rates are significantly lower than public list prices due to caching and volume.
Source: Aggregated and anonymized insights from Ramp’s Token Spend Management product, which gives companies daily visibility into AI usage and costs across providers and models.
What $1,000 buys in tokens: 14,567 million GPT-5-nano tokens, vs. 704 million GPT-5.5 tokens.
Think of it like company travel: the same trip costs economy or business class, except the price difference here is 20×, not 2×. Engineering books the tickets—finance gets the bill. Model tier is now a finance decision.
The spend distribution: Median vs. average
Token unit costs tell you what AI could cost. What you’re actually spending looks different. The distribution is wider than most finance teams expect.
AI spend has the same distribution as household income: the median is what's typical, the average gets pulled up by a small number of heavy spenders. You should benchmark against the median, not the mean:
| Metric | April 2026 |
|---|---|
| Median monthly cost | $2,246 |
| Average monthly cost | $140,842 |
| 75th percentile — top 25% | $14,843 |
| 90th percentile — top 10% | $73,030 |
| 95th percentile — top 5% | $211,409 |
| 99th percentile — top 1% | $831,338 |
Source: Aggregated and anonymized insights from Ramp’s Token Spend Management product, which gives companies daily visibility into AI usage and costs across providers and models.
What this means for budgeting: If your AI spend is near the median ($2,246/month), you're in early-adoption territory, and AI is likely a productivity tool for some teams, but not yet a COGS line item. If you're approaching $14,843/month (top 25% of AI spenders), AI is becoming a material budget line that warrants monthly review. At $73,030/month (top 10%) and above, AI spend management is a full-time finance function.
Spend thresholds worth knowing:
- 58% of companies tracked spend more than $1,000/month on AI
- 31% spend more than $10,000/month (the level where AI becomes a formal budget line)
- 13% spend more than $50,000/month
- 9% spend more than $100,000/month
- 2% spend more than $500,000/month
Per-employee-per-month (PEPM): The right unit for benchmarking
Per-total-company spend is hard to compare across companies of different sizes. PEPM normalizes for headcount and gives a benchmark you can apply to budget planning. Among companies tracked by Ramp in April 2026, the overall median was $46 PEPM, but the range is wide:
| Model usage depth | Median PEPM (April 2026) |
|---|---|
| 4–10 models in use | $28 |
| 11–25 models in use | $130 |
| 26+ models in use | $442 |
The middle 50% of companies fell between $3 and $352 PEPM. This wide range means that PEPM is most useful as a directional benchmark, not a precise target.
Model count is a strong proxy for AI maturity. The more models you’re running, the deeper AI is embedded in your operations, and the higher your per-employee cost.
Month-over-month AI spend swings of 40%+ are common even with stable headcount, so build in buffer when planning.
What drives AI token spend up
Model tier migration. The single biggest driver of unexpected cost increases. Your teams upgrade from a lightweight model to a frontier model for quality reasons, often without your visibility. The cost change can be 10–100×.
In April 2026, premium models represented 45.8% of tokens consumed by businesses, but 55.9% of total cost. That gap (more cost from fewer tokens) reflects the pricing premium of higher-tier models. Premium model cost share rose from 5.7% in June 2025 to 55.9% in April 2026, with the category shifting rapidly toward more capable, more expensive models.
Model proliferation. The median business used 9 models in April 2026, while the average used 16.5. Among businesses using 26 or more models, median monthly AI spend was $26,562. Complexity is expensive.
Agentic usage. AI agents run like a meter. Each step the agent takes to complete a task generates a separate charge, and the agent decides how many steps to take. You approved the task, but the agent determines the bill.
Automated usage doesn't feel like "using AI" until the invoice arrives. Ask your engineering team: which workflows run on automated agents, and is there a per-run cost ceiling in place?
Volume growth. From January 2025 to April 2026, token usage among businesses with connected AI grew 1,001%. Spend growth tends to lag usage growth as per-token prices fall—but total spend still grew 497% in that period.
What drives AI token spend down
Every inference request involves choices your engineering team is already making: which model, how much context, how fast. You don’t need to do anything exotic to reduce spend. It’s about making those choices deliberately instead of defaulting to the most capable or convenient option.
Caching. How much caching helps depends entirely on your workflow. Think of it like a photocopy machine: you pay once to set up the document, then copies are cheap. Workflows that reuse the same context (system prompts, static reference docs) achieve 80%+ cache hit rates. Workflows processing unique inputs each time (new documents, images, fresh conversations) see below 20%.
The cost difference is 5× for the same model. In practice: Claude Sonnet 4.6 businesses paid $0.62/1M tokens in April 2026, versus the $3.00/1M list price. That gap is caching.
Model tier discipline. Ask your engineering team to test your top 3 AI use cases on a lightweight model before defaulting to a premium one. The cost difference, often 10–20×, justifies a one-week test. Make model selection a finance-visible decision for any workflow expected to exceed $500/month.
Context management. Nearly 1 in 5 Anthropic tokens processed in April 2026 were long-context. That's not inherently wrong—some tasks need it. But large conversation histories, oversized system prompts, and redundant document chunks all cost tokens whether or not the model needs them.
The question isn't whether to use long context. It's whether you're choosing it deliberately for each workflow, or just passing everything forward by default.
What is your business actually spending on AI?
Benchmarks tell you what's normal. They don't tell you where your money is going.
You find out about AI spend after the invoice arrives—often from multiple providers, with no way to attribute costs to your teams, systems, or projects. Ramp’s AI Token Spend Management connects to your AI providers' billing APIs and shows you exactly what you're spending: by vendor, by model, by team, and by month. If your spend looks nothing like the median, you'll know why.
About this data
This data comes from aggregated and anonymized insights from Ramp’s Token Spend Management product, which gives companies daily visibility into AI usage and costs across providers and models.
FAQs
It depends heavily on how many AI workflows you're running. Build in a 40–50% volatility buffer — AI spend swings significantly month-to-month even with stable usage patterns. See the PEPM benchmarks section above for model-count based ranges.
Most companies spend relatively little on AI, and a small number of heavy spenders pull the average up sharply. The median ($2,246) is the better benchmark for most companies. If your spend is at $211,409/month, you're in the top 5% of AI-intensive companies.
Among businesses tracking AI spend, token usage grew 1,001% from January 2025 to April 2026. Per-token prices fell over the same period, so dollar spend grew more slowly. But total AI budgets are still climbing. Budget planning should assume 50–100% annual growth in AI spend for most companies.
PEPM is most precise for token-based AI spend, where costs scale with usage. For seat-based subscriptions (Cursor, GitHub Copilot, ChatGPT Team), the per-seat cost is fixed. PEPM is still useful for comparing total AI program cost across companies, but the drivers are different.
Don't miss these
“Browserbase builds infrastructure so AI agents can do real work. Ramp is doing the same for finance. It’s not another tool. It’s a system purpose-built for AI-driven finance, and that’s why we chose Ramp as our financial operating system from day one.”
Paul Klein IV
Founder & CEO, Browserbase
“We used to pay up to $20k a year for our AP platform. With Ramp, we’re earning back well over that amount. That's money that belongs to the mission now, not to the back-office software.”
Heidi Coffer
Chief Financial Officer, Boys & Girls Clubs of San Francisco
“The tricky thing about corporate travel policy is timing. We didn't need a stricter policy. We needed the policy to show up earlier. With Ramp Travel, it finally does.”
Keith Frantz
Director of Enterprise Risk Management, Prosper
“We're accountable to our funders, our partners, and the families we serve. That accountability starts with how we manage every dollar. Ramp makes it easy for our team to spend wisely, track in real time, and keep overhead low so more resources reach the families navigating infertility.”
Rachel Fruchtman
CFO, Jewish Fertility Foundation
“Each member of our team has an outsized impact due to our focus on using high-leverage tools like Ramp.”
Lauren Feeney
Controller, Perplexity
“With Ramp, we haven’t had to add accounting headcount to keep up with growth. The biggest takeaway is that instead of hiring our way through it, we fixed the workflow so we can keep supporting the organization as we scale.”
Melissa M.
VP of Accounting at Brandt Information Services
“In the public sector, every hour and every dollar belongs to the taxpayer. We can't afford to waste either. Ramp ensures we don't.”
Carly Ching
Finance Specialist, City of Ketchum
“Compared to our previous vendor, Ramp gave us true transaction-level granularity, making it possible for me to audit thousands of transactions in record time.”
Lisa Norris
Director of Compliance & Privacy Officer, ABB Optical
