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 flat-fee-per-account DAM and MAM with a free 500GB/5-user tier and unlimited paid users, for teams willing to pilot without much recent independent review evidence.
An enterprise digital asset management platform for newsrooms, publishers, museums, agencies, and manufacturers to organize and distribute digital assets.
A file-processing API that handles uploading, transforming, and delivering video, audio, images, and documents, for developers who'd otherwise build that infrastructure in-house.
Price published
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Billed on
Subscription per user per year, cheaper at volume
Flat price per account by volume; the vendor states there are no per-user fees
Not disclosed publicly. Pricing page shows three tiers (Starter, Advanced, Ultimate) all gated behind "Request a quote", billed annually; no per-user, per-GB, or credit figures are shown, so the actual billing unit cannot be confirmed from the vendor's site.
GB of data processed per month (combined input + output file size); paid tiers also gate priority processing slots, collaborator seats, and max file size. Overage on the paid Startup tier billed at $1.80/GB. Enterprise tier is custom/quote-based tiered pricing with whitelabeling.
Deployment
On-premise, Cloud
Cloud, On-premise
Cloud, On-premise
Cloud
Free plan
Yes
Yes
No
No
Free trial
No
Yes
No
No
Transparency index
80%
90%
Not checked
Not checked
Most common complaint
It is a file platform with DAM features rather than a DAM: asset-level metadata and rights are thinner
On-premise is available only in the enterprise tier, whose price is not published
Not checked
Not checked