Accountants vs bookkeepers.
Pick two jobs to see which needs a human more, what AI can do in each and when each could change. Share the link to the pair.
Accountants and Auditors need a human more than Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks: 66 against 60 out of 100, where higher is safer.
Accountants and Auditors
Needs a humanAI helpsAI does it
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks
Needs a humanAI helpsAI does it
| Measure | Accountants and Auditors | Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks |
|---|---|---|
| Still needs a humanOur headline score for each job, from 0 to 100. Higher is safer: AI can do less of the work, or does it less well.It combines how much of the job AI can do with how well AI does it compared with a qualified person, and it is always shown beside those answers.How the score works · More in the glossary | 66/100↑ saferWill AI replace them? A little. | 60/100↑ saferWill AI replace them? A little. |
| Task splitA job’s working time sorted three ways: tasks AI does, tasks AI helps a person with, and tasks that need a human.The three shares add up to 100%. Amber is always the human share.More in the glossary | AI does 10% · AI helps 67% · Needs a human 23% | AI does 18% · AI helps 69% · Needs a human 13% |
| Can AI do it?How much of a job’s working time AI can handle today, from 0 to 100. Higher means AI can do more of the job.Also called coverage. It is not the same as the task split: a task AI only helps with still counts for part of its time.How we measure it · More in the glossary | 38/100share of task time AI can handle today | 47/100share of task time AI can handle today |
| Is it better than a person?How AI’s work compares with a qualified person’s on this job, from 0 to 100, where 50 means just as good.Also called quality parity. Most jobs have no direct test yet, so their pages say “Not yet measured.”How we judge quality · More in the glossary | D Not yet measured | D Not yet measured |
| When could it be replaced?The span of years when AI could largely do this job, covering 8 in 10 of our simulated futures. A range, not a forecast.The big year is the middle one: half the futures come sooner, half later. “2060+” means later than 2060, where our model stops.How the timeline works · More in the glossary | 20392035–2047 | 20382035–2046 |
| What’s stopping itThe things that keep work with people, such as licensing, legal liability, clients wanting a person, and physical work, each scored 0 to 100.Licensing, regulation, liability and client preference also slow our timeline a little.More in the glossary | Liabilitystrength 60/100 | Evidence gapstrength 60/100 |
| Physical workThe share of a job’s time spent on hands-on work. Software cannot do it, so AI only counts there as far as robots can.The kind of robot needed runs from fixed machines to mobile robots to humanoids with hands.More in the glossary | —2% of task time is physical | —13% of task time is physical |
| AI cost vs a personThe cost of AI doing the hours of work it could handle, next to a person’s wage for those hours. Both are ranges.The AI cost covers the AI service only: not setup, licenses, oversight or the time a person still spends checking.More in the glossary | AI $80–$7,860a person $21,180–$54,470 | AI $100–$9,800a person $16,960–$35,110 |
| US workers | 1.4M | 1.4M |
| Median payThe middle yearly wage for the job: half the workers earn more and half earn less.More in the glossary | $83,680 | $50,670 |
| Projected jobs, 2025–35The US government’s estimate of how much a job will grow or shrink over ten years, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.More in the glossary | +5.0% | −5.6% |
| Openings a yearHow many jobs the government expects to need filling each year, from growth plus people retiring or changing careers.More in the glossary | 115,300 | 144,100 |
| UK name | Same name | Same name |
| What the AIs say | 0 yes, 4 partly, 0 noof 4 AI assistants asked | 0 yes, 4 partly, 0 noof 4 AI assistants asked |
| People asking (US) | 2,400Google searches a month asking if AI will replace it | 210Google searches a month asking if AI will replace it |
Scores run 0 to 100; higher is safer. Years are ranges from our ScenarioOne possible future in our timeline model, with its own guesses about how fast AI improves and how fast employers take it up.Each job’s range comes from 10,000 of them. The year-by-year charts show ten, spread across the range.More in the glossary model, not forecasts. How we score jobs.
Popular comparisons
The jobs people search for most, side by side with the job they are most often weighed against.
- Accountants vs Bookkeepers66 · 60
- Lawyers vs Paralegals72 · 71
- Software developers vs Programmers62 · 55
- Software developers vs Web developers62 · 55
- Radiologists vs Radiologic technologists71 · 78
- Data scientists vs Business intelligence analysts61 · 54
- Data scientists vs Statisticians61 · 60
- Actuaries vs Accountants70 · 66
- Pharmacists vs Pharmacy technicians71 · 74
- Registered nurses vs Nurse practitioners80 · 69
- Anesthesiologists vs Nurse anesthetists80 · 81
- Mental health counselors vs Psychologists73 · 69
- Psychiatrists vs Psychologists74 · 69
- Physical therapists vs Occupational therapists75 · 75
- Sonographers vs MRI technologists81 · 74
- Electrical engineers vs Mechanical engineers70 · 68
- Civil engineers vs Architects73 · 72
- Financial advisors vs Financial analysts59 · 63
- Real estate agents vs Insurance agents65 · 64
- Graphic designers vs Web designers62 · 57
- Graphic designers vs Artists and illustrators62 · 75
- Writers vs Technical writers56 · 56
- Electricians vs Plumbers81 · 82
- Airline pilots vs Air traffic controllers76 · 66
- Elementary teachers vs Teaching assistants75 · 79
- Security analysts vs Network architects59 · 64
- Project managers vs Management analysts66 · 62
- HR specialists vs HR managers61 · 71
- Marketing specialists vs Marketing managers54 · 67
- Actors vs Musicians and singers80 · 83
Still needs a human scores, first job · second job. Any two jobs can be compared with the picker above.