KentoHQ vs Polsia: who decides a task is done?
Polsia popularized the AI-workforce idea and has real scale; KentoHQ was built around the failure its reviews keep naming — tasks marked done that never actually happened.
Polsia raised serious money, built real momentum, and popularized the idea every busy owner wants: describe the work and an AI team does it. But its public reviews keep repeating one complaint — tasks marked complete that never actually happened — because the same model that does the work also grades it. KentoHQ was engineered around exactly that failure: a separate engine machine-checks every task before done, and the agent gets no vote.
KentoHQ vs Polsia, side by side
| KentoHQ | Polsia | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A team of 11 verified AI employees + autopilot coordinator | Autonomous AI-workforce platform (category pioneer) |
| Does the work vs you build it | Brief in plain language; agents plan and execute | Describe the work; the AI team executes |
| Verified output | Yes - separate engine machine-checks every task before done | No - the model that does the work also grades it |
| Completion complaint | Designed against it - unprovable tasks reported as not done | Reviews repeat: tasks marked done that never happened |
| Pricing model | Flat subscription, no per-seat, no credit meter | Per Polsia's plans; check for credit consumption |
| Whole team vs one job | Yes - 11 specialists across the business | Yes - a workforce platform with broad scope |
| Acts but never auto-sends | Yes - spending, sending, deleting wait for approval | Per Polsia's controls |
| Self-improving | Yes - correct once, it becomes a permanent rule | Per Polsia's product |
| Data residency | Yes - host in the US or EU | Per Polsia's hosting |
| Track record / scale | Newer, focused on verification | Yes - bigger team, longer track record at scale |
| Best for | Owners who need 'done' to actually mean done | Teams who want Polsia's stack and will double-check 'done' |
What is the difference between KentoHQ and Polsia?
Polsia popularized the AI-workforce idea; KentoHQ fixed the failure its reviews keep naming. Both let you describe work and have an AI team do it. The structural difference is verification: Polsia lets the agent decide a task is done, while KentoHQ moves that decision out of the agent's hands into a separate engine. That single design choice is why the two products feel different the moment something goes wrong.
Why do Polsia reviews mention tasks that weren't really done?
Because the same model that does the work also grades it. Read Polsia's recent reviews and one pattern dominates: tasks marked complete that never actually happened — deploys that didn't deploy, content that wasn't published, credits consumed for work that has to be redone by hand. That isn't a Polsia-specific flaw; it's what happens across this whole category when the worker is also the judge.
How does KentoHQ guarantee a task is actually done?
KentoHQ agents cannot mark a task done. They must declare machine-checkable proof and the engine runs the checks — the agent has no vote:
- A file that must exist, a command that must pass, a URL that must respond.
- A quality bar an independent reviewer must confirm.
Failed checks send the work back. Tasks that can't be proven are reported honestly as not done — never silently marked complete.
Where is Polsia ahead of KentoHQ?
Honesty cuts both ways. Polsia has a bigger team, more integrations built in-house, and a longer track record at scale. If you need their specific stack and you're comfortable double-checking what 'done' means, they're a serious option. KentoHQ is the newer, verification-first bet — narrower history, but built so you don't have to re-check the work.
Why pick KentoHQ over Polsia?
Pick KentoHQ when you need 'done' to actually mean done. Beyond verification:
- 60-second start — sign up, hire from a ready bench, give the first task. No workflow building.
- You hold the keys — spending, sending, and deleting wait for your approval policies.
- Flat pricing — no credit meter consumed on work you'd have to redo.
- Self-improving — correct an agent once and it becomes a standing rule for every future task.
Where Polsia is the better choice
Polsia has a bigger team, more in-house integrations, and a longer track record at scale than KentoHQ. They pioneered the autonomous AI-workforce category and have real momentum. If you need their specific stack and you're comfortable double-checking what 'done' means, they're a serious, proven option.
Which should you choose?
Choose KentoHQ if…
Owners who need 'done' to actually mean done, on a flat bill they don't have to ration.
Choose Polsia if…
Teams that want Polsia's mature stack and scale and will double-check completion themselves.
Frequently asked
Is Polsia a real company?
Yes — Polsia is an established AI-workforce pioneer that raised serious money and built real momentum. KentoHQ's difference is structural: verified completion run by a separate engine, not the agent.
What is the main complaint about Polsia?
Its public reviews repeat one pattern: tasks marked complete that never actually happened, because the same model doing the work also grades it. KentoHQ is built specifically against that failure.
How is KentoHQ's verification different?
Agents can't mark their own tasks done. They declare machine-checkable proof and a separate engine runs the checks; failures go back, and unprovable work is reported honestly as not done.
Where is Polsia better than KentoHQ?
Polsia has a bigger team, more in-house integrations, and a longer track record at scale. If you need their stack and will double-check 'done,' they're a serious choice.
Does KentoHQ act without my approval?
No. Agents act, but spending, sending, and deleting wait for your approval policies, and you can stop or redirect any running task.
How do I try KentoHQ?
It's free in early access with 100 verified tasks included — sign up and give your first task in about a minute.
Try the verified version free →
See all KentoHQ comparisons, or how it works.