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.
A modular, metadata-heavy DAM aimed at large organisations with IT capacity to manage taxonomy, sold through quote-based pricing with on-prem and private-cloud options.
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 DAM offered as both cloud and on-premise, aimed at small-to-mid teams that want fast metadata-driven search over large asset libraries and want files to stay on their own infrastructure.
Price published
Yes
No
No
No
Billed on
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
A modular model — you pay for the modules you take
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.
Annual subscription covering all features, integrations, updates and support
Deployment
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud
Cloud, On-premise
Cloud, On-premise
Free plan
Yes
No
No
No
Free trial
No
No
No
No
Transparency index
80%
10%
Not checked
30%
Most common complaint
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner
The pricing page works as a lead form rather than a price list
Not checked
Like the platforms it competes with, it asks for a form submission before naming a price