For years, the build versus buy debate felt settled.

SaaS was the obvious choice. It was faster to deploy, easier to maintain, and required fewer internal resources. If a problem existed, there was almost always a tool you could plug in and move on.

That logic worked in a world where building software was slow, expensive, and dependent on deep engineering teams.

That world no longer exists.

When building became accessible

AI and no code platforms have shifted the equation. What once took months of development can now be prototyped in weeks, sometimes days. Internal teams can automate workflows, create custom tools, and tailor systems without starting from scratch or relying entirely on vendors.

As generative AI becomes more capable, enterprises are increasingly leaning toward building within the organization, especially for internal workflows, operational tooling, and domain-specific use cases that generic platforms struggle to serve.

This shift is not about rejecting SaaS. It is about reclaiming control.

What this means for SaaS

SaaS is not disappearing. But its role is changing.

When building becomes viable, buying has to earn its place. Tools can no longer rely on convenience alone. They need to offer something meaningfully better than what an internal team could create with modern tooling.

The question is no longer “should we buy this?”
It is “what makes this worth buying at all?”

Where real value will come from

From what we are seeing, three things will increasingly define which solutions survive and scale.

First, unique value. One-size-fits-all products will struggle in a world that demands context. Solutions that adapt to how a business actually works, not how a template assumes it should, will matter more.

Second, trust at scale. Security, performance, and deep integration will become non-negotiable. As systems grow more interconnected, anything that creates friction or risk will be replaced.

Third, speed of evolution. Companies that rethink their tech stack with AI and no code at the core will move faster than those trying to retrofit new capabilities onto old architectures.

A different question entirely

This is why the debate is no longer build or buy.

That framing belongs to an earlier era.

The real question is how organizations design systems that are flexible, resilient, and future-ready. Sometimes that means buying. Sometimes it means building. Increasingly, it means blending the two with intent.

The companies that get this right will not be defined by the tools they use, but by how intelligently they assemble them.