Verdict
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.
An open-source PHP/Symfony platform unifying PIM, DAM, CMS and MDM on one codebase, for teams with in-house developers or an integrator partner rather than a marketing team wanting to self-serve.
A digital asset management platform for enterprises, agencies, museums, and nonprofits, paired with in-house consulting and data-migration services.
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
Not per user — the vendor states unlimited users and permission groups
Annual licence per edition, not per user
Not disclosed publicly. Plans are differentiated by number of admin users, storage (TB), and number of portals (e.g. Essential: 5 admin users/1TB; Signature: 20 admin users/2TB/3 portals; Premium: 50 admin users/5TB/5 portals); exact per-unit or per-tier prices are not published, visitors must request a consult.
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
Deployment
Cloud
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud, On-premise, Hybrid
On-premise, Cloud
Free plan
No
Yes
No
Yes
Free trial
No
No
No
No
Transparency index
20%
100%
Not checked
80%
Most common complaint
The promise not to charge per user is prominent, but there is no figure to compare it against
It is a broader platform than a DAM — some capability has to be built rather than switched on
Not checked
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner