Verdict
A headless CMS with a built-in asset library for images and files, not a standalone DAM — it lacks file versioning, rights/expiry management and native video transcoding.
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.
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 cloud DAM billed by storage and configuration rather than seat count, aimed at agencies and distributed marketing teams with large or growing user bases where per-seat pricing would balloon.
Price published
No
Yes
No
No
Billed on
Seats, content types and volume
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
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.
Not per user — the vendor states unlimited users and permission groups
Deployment
Cloud
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud, On-premise
Cloud
Free plan
No
Yes
No
No
Free trial
No
No
No
No
Transparency index
10%
80%
Not checked
20%
Most common complaint
The calculator shows what drives the price without showing the price
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner
Not checked
The promise not to charge per user is prominent, but there is no figure to compare it against