Gamma vs Beautiful.ai: fast drafts with share analytics, or brand-locked team decks
Gamma gives per-slide analytics on its Pro tier at a lower seat price. Beautiful.ai gives live chart data and brand control. Gamma prices are third-party and flagged.
Presentation maker in this post means an AI tool that turns a prompt or an outline into a slide deck. Gamma and Beautiful.ai both do that, and both sell to people who make decks for others. They differ in what they optimise: Gamma moves fast from a blank page to a shareable draft, and Beautiful.ai keeps a team’s slides locked to one brand system.
Verdict first
Choose Gamma when one person needs a draft quickly, wants to see which slides a prospect spent time on, and can accept a lower seat price with third-party figures. Choose Beautiful.ai when several people edit one deck, the brand must stay fixed, and charts need to refresh from data.
The 2026.10 index puts Beautiful.ai at 80 out of 100 and Gamma at 50. Gamma’s score rests on strong tracking documentation and a thin data score; Beautiful.ai’s rests on live data and two handoff points. Neither score measures how the slides look, and a reader who cares most about design should weigh that separately.
What we checked
Beautiful.ai’s figures come from its official pricing page, read on 2026-10-17. Gamma’s official pricing page refused our request that day, so its prices come from third-party trackers, and its analytics rule comes from its own help center. We flag each Gamma figure as third-party in the results table.
| Attribute | Gamma | Beautiful.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | Free with 400 one-time credits; Plus about 9 dollars a seat each month on annual billing (third-party) | Pro 14.50 dollars per month billed annually |
| Team price | Business 40 dollars a member each month on annual billing | Team 40 dollars a user each month on annual billing, 2 to 20 users |
| Viewer analytics | Pro and up: views and time per slide, unique viewers | Viewer and slide analytics, engagement alerts on Team |
| Live chart data | No mention found in the pages we read | Live data linking to charts and tables on Team |
| Export | PDF, PPTX, PNG, Google Slides; badge on Free | Editable PowerPoint and PDF |
| Index, out of 100 | 50 | 80 |
Links behind the Gamma and Beautiful.ai figures: Beautiful.ai pricing page, Gamma for Business, Gamma help center.
Third-party trackers disagree on Gamma’s monthly price. One lists Plus at 10 dollars and another at 12, so the annual figure is the one we quote. Treat every Gamma number here as unverified until you see the checkout page.
Where Gamma is stronger
Speed to a first draft is the usual reason people choose it, and the help center describes an export path that works without a design handoff. Its Pro analytics are the more detailed of the two on the pages we read: they show time and views per slide and separate unique viewers, which lets a seller judge which section a buyer read.
The entry price is also the attraction. If the figures hold, a one-person team can get shareable analytics for less per seat than Beautiful.ai’s Team plan. That is a conditional advantage, because the price is third-party and the analytics sit on the Pro tier.
Where Beautiful.ai is stronger
Brand control and chart data. The Team plan lists live data linking to charts and tables, which matters for a monthly business review where the numbers move but the layout must not. It also lists custom branded themes and a shared asset library, so a second editor can work inside the same brand rules.
Handoff. Beautiful.ai lists editable PowerPoint export and an offline desktop player. Gamma’s PowerPoint export works, but its own guide warns that card-based layouts may need adjustment after export, which is a cost you pay each time a deck moves to PowerPoint.
What the index leaves out
The index does not score how fast a tool produces a first draft, how well its AI writes, or how often its exports break. A team that drafts fifty decks a week may care most about those points. Read the method page for the full list of what the index leaves out.
Evidence and method
Sources: Beautiful.ai’s pricing page, read on 2026-10-17; Gamma’s help-center articles on analytics and export, read the same day; and third-party trackers for Gamma prices, used only where marked. We did not trial either tool or test PowerPoint exports ourselves. Prices are list prices before taxes, promotions and seat minimums.
Summary
- Choose Gamma for quick drafts and per-slide analytics, after you confirm the Pro price on its own pricing page.
- Choose Beautiful.ai for brand-locked team decks with charts that refresh from data.
- Do not compare the two on design alone; neither score here measures it.
FAQ
Which tool shows time per slide on a shared link?
Gamma's help center says full analytics, including slide views, time spent per slide and unique viewers, are available on its Pro plan or higher. Beautiful.ai lists viewer and slide analytics on its Team plan.
Is Gamma cheaper than Beautiful.ai per seat?
Third-party trackers list Gamma Plus at about 9 dollars a seat each month on annual billing, and Pro at about 18 dollars. Beautiful.ai's Team plan is 40 dollars a user each month on annual billing. Gamma's official pricing page was not retrieved, so confirm before you buy.
Can both tools export to PowerPoint?
Yes. Gamma's help center lists PowerPoint export on every plan, with a Gamma badge on Free exports. Beautiful.ai lists editable PowerPoint export on its distribution table.