Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Knack vs Microsoft Power Apps comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Knack
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
31st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No-Code Development Platforms (6th)
Microsoft Power Apps
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Low-Code Development Platforms (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of Knack is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Power Apps is 9.5%, down from 15.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Power Apps9.5%
Knack0.9%
Other89.6%
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

ND
Managing Director at ITdirector.ie
Flexible and granular security options, good filtering, and the pricing model is cost-effective
The vendor does a really poor job of marketing this software because it should be more popular. This is something that I have pointed out to them. It's a super piece of software, but very few people are aware of it. I am an EX-IT director and I've worked in big systems, and I'm amazed this solution isn't more popular. The "native" integration with other products could be improved. The user interface for the systems that you build can use some improvement because as it is now, you may have to use HTML and CSS to make it look more modern or to match a clients existing look. The documentation is amazing, although they don't do videos and their YouTube channel is very poor. They could create some training videos.
BS
Automation Enthusiast at Self employed
Low-code AI workflows have streamlined content curation and currently support rapid app creation
Microsoft Power Apps could be improved because there are still a lot of jargons and too many moving parts. For example, if you look at Copilot, the term Copilot is confusing in the sense of whether it is Copilot in M365, Copilot Studio, or Copilot in Microsoft Power Apps. There is a plan designer which uses Copilot. The whole thing how AI has been positioned is still not lucid for the end user. An end user wants to know exactly what they want and where they go to get it. I think that could also be because things are evolving so fast. From an end-user perspective, the way it has been positioned, the clarity and the boundaries between the different types of offerings and AI offerings available is confusing as of now. There should be better clarity on that. The biggest issue I have, and I have also spoken to a few of my clients about this, is the licensing model. In traditional software development, almost 95 percent of the time, the development team bears the cost of the licenses. For example, if I develop something, I may have to pay licenses for four or five different software that I use. As a user, if you use my services, you probably pay something to me as a subscription, but you do not have to bother about the licenses. All that is wrapped under the hood. Unfortunately, in Power Platform as such, and even in other low-code things like UiPath, if you use a premium feature such as Dataverse, almost everything ends up using Dataverse or SQL Server or some relational database. If you use that, then as an app builder or app maker you have to have a premium license. The end user too would need to have a premium license. That really makes the adoption prohibitive. It is too expensive. We are talking about something like around just for Microsoft Power Apps alone, approximately twenty dollars per month, which is extremely high. Another point to consider for what else can be improved in Microsoft Power Apps is that one does not know what compute power one is getting when one buys a license. If you look at the licensing model, you will get to know how much of Dataverse storage you will get in terms of log storage, database storage, and file storage. However, you do not get to know how much of compute power is being given to you. I do not think Microsoft has an SLA saying that any request of a certain amount, such as MB per second, you will get a response time of whatever, one by sixtieth of a second or some millisecond. I do not think that they have that performance SLA in place. They do have storage SLA which comes with the license, but they do not have a corresponding SLA for performance.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The security is the most valuable feature, in particular, the way I can give different access to different areas to different people, so you can really fine-tune access for different users."
"The solution allows you to use data to create excellent UI and quickly deliver an app. It speeds up production time."
"The solution becomes easier the set up once you get used to it."
"Overall, I would rate Microsoft Power Apps nine out of ten."
"For our purposes, it is quite scalable."
"I would say that the most valuable features are the user interface, navigation, and business routes."
"It offers integration with several Microsoft products, including SharePoint and Outlook, in my opinion, is a huge plus."
"In my experience with Microsoft Power Apps over the past two years, the best feature is its seamless connection with the Microsoft ecosystem. It integrates well with Microsoft Teams, and you can use it with minimal programming, which is typical for low-code and no-code apps."
"The model that allows you to establish flow automation is getting a lot of traction from the customer side. It offers a lot of flexibility."
 

Cons

"The user interface for the systems that you build can use some improvement because as it is now, you have to do a lot of HTML and CSS to make it look modern."
"Microsoft PowerApps could improve the speed of Power Automate, it is not very fast."
"Technical support could be faster, and more accurate."
"In some cases, PowerApps would have some limitations in terms of the data, the number of transactions, and so on, but for a normal solution, it would be enough."
"The flexibility and the user interface need improvement."
"Customer support needs improvement."
"I have always felt that you need an IT background to use this solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft's customer service or technical support around a three. I find it's better to read forum posts than to call the support staff at Microsoft."
"The scalability of the solution could improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product has really good value, as it doesn't have a per-user cost, there's a flat fee."
"There are areas of Microsoft PowerApps that can be improved. For example, the license policies are expensive to purchases the premium connectors. If a company would like to use the premium features, they have to pay a lot of money. The Microsoft PowerApps portal could be easier to use when there are a lot of external users because if a company has 1,000 external users, it is too expensive to use the Microsoft PowerApps portal."
"The tool is neither cheap nor expensive. The tool's cost is manageable."
"There are two licensing costs, one is pay-as-you-go, or you can develop it for one year."
"If you start to use any premium connectors that are not stored in a SharePoint list or on an Excel workbook, then it costs $4 per user per month. If you want unlimited, it's about $16 per month for unlimited apps, and unlimited connectors."
"Power Apps is relatively cheap compared to other low-code and no-code systems like OutSystems and Mendix."
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
"The enterprise-level costs a great deal of money, and you have to purchase additional licenses to scale it."
"Microsoft PowerApps is expensive, but there are many features included."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
19%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Healthcare Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise50
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How would you choose between Microsoft PowerApps and Salesforce Platform?
I think it depends on your use case. If your organization uses Microsoft Enterprise products, PowerApps will work better in your environment. Similarly, if you have a Salesforce integration in pla...
Would you choose ServiceNow over Microsoft PowerApps?
Hi Netanya, I will choose ServiceNow because ServiceNow is a very good tool compared to Microsoft PowerApp. Because ServiceNow has a very strong module (Performance Analysis) reporting which will ...
Would you choose Microsoft Azure App Service or PowerApps?
Microsoft Azure App Service is helpful if you need to set up temporary servers for customers to run their programs in locations that other cloud providers do not cater to. When servers are closer t...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
PowerApps, MS PowerApps
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens Kaiser Permanente VMware SunChemical C.R. England Philips The Salvation Army United Way U.S. Green Building Council Cambridge University Press
TransAlta, Rackspace, Telstra
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, ServiceNow, Oracle and others in Rapid Application Development Software. Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.