How we compare.
Every comparison page on this site follows the same rule set: seven weighted criteria, official sources only, dated retrieval, and an honest answer when a competitor is the better fit.
Publishly’s comparison pages weigh seven criteria — price at 100 accounts, room to grow, failure visibility, retry safety, token health, API surface, and docs quality. Every competitor number is pulled from that vendor’s official pricing page, dated at retrieval, and re-verified every 30 days. When a competitor is the better choice for a use case, the page says so.
What we weigh.
These seven criteria are the same set on every comparison page — nothing is added or dropped to flatter a particular matchup.
Price as your account list grows
Not the entry price — what the bill looks like at 100 connected accounts, computed from each vendor’s own published rate card.
Account scalability
Is there a hard cap? Does the price scale per account, or is there an unlimited-accounts tier — and at what price does it start?
Failure visibility
When a post fails, does the vendor publish that it tells you — a reason, a class, anything beyond a status icon?
Retry safety
Are failed posts retried automatically, and is double-posting on retry a published non-issue or simply unaddressed?
Token health
Does the vendor publish anything about detecting or alerting on an expired or revoked connection before more posts are lost?
API surface
Is the product API-first, or is the API a secondary surface bolted onto a dashboard-first product?
Docs quality
Are pricing, limits, and API behavior published clearly enough to verify a claim without contacting sales?
Every number, sourced and dated.
This is the full source list behind every competitor claim published on the site — the same list any comparison page draws from.
Every competitor number traces to an official pricing page, retrieved and dated — not a review site, a forum post, or an estimate.
| Competitor | Claim | Source | Publisher | Retrieved |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ayrshare | Business plan pricing at 100 profiles | www.ayrshare.com/pricing | Ayrshare (official pricing page) | 2026-08-10 |
| Buffer | Team plan per-channel rate | buffer.com/pricing | Buffer (official pricing page) | 2026-08-10 |
| Hootsuite | Entry plan & Professional plan pricing | www.hootsuite.com/plans | Hootsuite (official plans page) | 2026-08-10 |
| bundle.social | PRO tier & free tier limits | bundle.social | bundle.social (official site) | 2026-08-10 |
| Metricool | Tiered plans & 50-brand cap | metricool.com/pricing | Metricool (official pricing page) | 2026-08-10 |
| Upload-Post | Profile-count tier pricing | upload-post.com | Upload-Post (vendor llms-full.txt) | 2026-08-10 |
| Meta / LinkedIn / TikTok | Access & refresh token expiry | developers.facebook.com/docs/facebook-login/guides/access-tokens/get-long-lived | Meta / LinkedIn / TikTok developer docs | 2026-08-10 |
Competitor pricing & features last checked: 2026-08-10
Numbers go stale. We re-check them.
Pricing pages change without notice, so every claim carries an expiry, not just a retrieval date.
Competitor pricing is re-verified every 30 days; general platform facts (like token-expiry windows) are re-verified every 90 days. A page whose claims pass their window gets re-checked before the next rebuild.
The commitment.
When a competitor is the better choice for a use case, we say so on the page. Every comparison names what the other tool is genuinely good at — enterprise governance, a broader network list, a polished consumer app, a lower price at a small scale — before making the case for where Publishly fits instead.
See the comparisons this builds.
Every page follows this same methodology — pricing, caps, and failure visibility, side by side.