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 cloud portfolio and image-storage platform for individual photographers, with client galleries and built-in print/licensing sales.
An on-prem, cloud or hybrid DAM aimed at likely DACH-region enterprise manufacturers who need to keep data in-house, with a public review record too thin to lean on without running your own trial.
A developer-facing image and video transformation API and CDN, billed from one pooled credit balance covering storage, transformations and bandwidth together.
Price published
Yes
No
No
Yes
Billed on
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
Quote-only. Priced per named "Library Seat" (2-5 seats depending on tier, custom for Enterprise) plus a storage allotment per tier (1TB-5TB, custom for Enterprise) and a cap on "Advanced Integrations" (0 to unlimited). Unlimited invited/contributor users and unlimited Social Content Publisher seats included on all/most tiers. Annual or monthly billing toggle shown on the pricing page, but no dollar amounts are published — all tiers show a "Get Pricing" CTA to a demo/sales call.
Quoted per customer
Credits: one credit is 1,000 transformations, or 1 GB of storage, or 1 GB of video bandwidth
Deployment
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud
On-premise, Cloud, Hybrid
Cloud
Free plan
Yes
No
No
Yes
Free trial
No
No
No
Yes
Transparency index
80%
Not checked
20%
60%
Most common complaint
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner
Not checked
No prices, though it does name three deployment models including fully managed on-premise
Prices are published for the API but not for the DAM, so the product being compared with a DAM still has no price