Autodesk Fusion and manufacturing subscribers paid for generative AI more often than AutoCAD and architecture, engineering, and construction subscribers
Share with an OpenAI, Anthropic, Midjourney, or Perplexity purchase, August 18, 2025–August 18, 2026
Share paying for generative AI
Source: YipitData U.S. e-receipt panel. Make n=307; Design n=631. Segments use Autodesk product names in receipt line items; subscribers appearing in both segments were excluded. The Make sample is modest.
Chart data
| Series | Share paying for generative AI |
|---|---|
| Make — Fusion and manufacturing | 29.8% |
| Design — architecture, engineering, and construction | 16.6% |
Did Fusion and manufacturing subscribers also differ in payments to other software providers?
Make subscribers also paid GitHub more often than Design subscribers, at 9.9% versus 2.7%. Adobe moved in the opposite direction, reaching 27.6% of Design subscribers and 23.5% of Make subscribers. That contrast makes a general difference in receipt visibility less likely to explain the generative-AI gap.
Assumptions & Methodologies
We analyzed our U.S. e-receipt panel from August 18, 2025–August 18, 2026. Make included Fusion, Inventor, and Product Design & Manufacturing; Design included AutoCAD, Revit, Civil 3D, AEC Collection, BIM, and Navisworks. Product names came from receipt line items, and subscribers matching both groups were excluded. Paid generative AI covered OpenAI, Anthropic, Midjourney, and Perplexity. The metric is purchase incidence, not spend. Enterprise invoiced seats are outside the panel, the Make sample is modest, and the analysis does not show demand for Autodesk AI specifically.