Verdict
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.
Not checked
A brand-management platform built around a single, always-current source of truth for guidelines, logos and templates, aimed at brand teams working with internal staff and external agencies.
Not checked
Price published
Yes
No
No
Yes
Billed on
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
No genuine dollar pricing is published. The vendor's package-comparison page lists four tiers: Community Edition (free, open-source, self-hosted), Growth (SaaS, shown only as "Starting at $0 Annually" with a free-trial CTA — no real recurring price disclosed), Advanced and Premium (both "Call for a quote"). No billing unit (per user, per SKU, per asset, per GB) is stated anywhere on the site for the paid tiers.
Monthly active users
Consumption-based credits, sold in monthly tiers ($25–$500/mo self-serve, custom above that). Credits are spent on Management (2 credits/GB/month for stored assets), Delivery (1 credit/GB bandwidth), and Transformation (variable by operation). Per-credit rate drops as plan tier rises ($0.25 down to $0.12, monthly billing; slightly cheaper on annual commitment). Each plan also states an implied storage/bandwidth cap in GB.
Deployment
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud, On-premise
Cloud
Cloud
Free plan
Yes
No
No
No
Free trial
No
No
No
No
Transparency index
80%
Not checked
30%
Not checked
Most common complaint
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner
Not checked
The MAU model favours occasional users, but there is no figure to verify that with
Not checked