Verdict
A visually organized, board-based DAM for photo/image-heavy creative and marketing teams, with a genuinely usable free tier and a history of shifting, steep paid-tier pricing.
A team file library billed as a flat monthly fee with unlimited users, aimed at organisations where most people only need to download an approved file a few times a month.
An open-source DAM, CMS, and PIM platform combining asset, content, and product management for mid-to-large enterprises in banking, insurance, and retail.
A self-hosted file-sync and collaboration platform some organisations stretch into asset-library duty; tagging, batch metadata editing and dynamic tag-based collections are still limited or missing.
Price published
No
Yes
No
Yes
Billed on
Credits; users are not billed
Flat price per account — users are not a billing unit
Cloud service: billed by storage capacity (GB) plus which optional modules you select; user accounts are unlimited/uncapped. No public price list — pricing is obtained via a configurator/calculator or by requesting a quote. On-premise/hosted deployments use Free, Standard, and Enterprise license editions (feature-gated), also quote-only. A non-commercial Free Edition exists with no disclosed price.
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
Deployment
Cloud
Cloud
Cloud, On-premise
On-premise, Cloud
Free plan
Yes
No
No
Yes
Free trial
Yes
Yes
No
No
Transparency index
60%
70%
Not checked
80%
Most common complaint
The free tier is described in detail while the paid tiers are named only
Storage ceilings are modest next to enterprise platforms, so large video libraries outgrow the tiers quickly
Not checked
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner