Coda, from Coda Project headquartered in San Francisco, is a template-based document generation solution, supporting a variety of use cases presented by the vendor as ideal for smaller companies that might otherwise be relying on spreadsheets to maintain (for instance) product development, or inventory tracking. It is available free, with paid editions to support teams, automations, or for more advanced collaboration and workspace features, as well as more advanced security features.
$0
per month
Pricing
Coda
Editions & Modules
Free
$0.00
per month
Pro
$10.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Team
$30.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Enterprise
Custom Pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Coda
Free Trial
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
With Coda, you only pay for Doc Makers.
Often one person creates a doc, others edit it, and some simply observe from afar. Instead of charging for everyone, we only charge for the people who create docs.
Interested in enterprise pricing? Visit coda.io/enterprise
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Coda
Considered Both Products
Coda
Verified User
Employee
Chose Coda
Coda is not as great as ClickUp or Notion in many ways, but it surely has a better user interface and pricing in my view and allows good collaboration. However, integrations work much better with other competitors as compared with Coda, and would prefer others if pricing was …
Verified User
Manager
Chose Coda
Trello seems to be more focused on IT oriented projects where as Coda has wide scale applications across all departments. Coda was selected because of the perception it was more dynamic and I believe it has proven to be more dynamic. Coda is a very easy to use and understand …
I don't know why leadership choose Coda over Google, but I do see the value in the organization as well as diversity of what you can do with pages designs and integrations
We used Airtable for a while and looked at Notion briefly. Airtable is good, yet a bit technical and doesn't come with rich text and formatting capabilities--so less suitable for publishing/sharing with the rest of the organization. We haven't used Notion for real; I did look …
Coda is very aesthetically appealing and fun to create docs. The benefit of Coda is that it makes a lot automated, but what is sacrificed is the flexibility that other tools can offer.
For general use cases, Google Docs or Airtable are often a better starting place. But if things get complex or you're constantly pairing the two together, consider graduating to Coda to save yourself long-term headaches.
Notion is great for personal use, but the powerful …
The tables within Coda are similar to lists in SharePoint or Google Tables, but the document portion of Coda is what sets it apart. Having the ability to summarize that table data in a document is unique to Coda.
Coda is the only tool with the ability to fully customize your views and the behavior within a given data table. They've put a LOT of thought into this and are miles above and beyond Smartsheet, Airtable, and Notion (I've evaluated all three extensively).
We were looking for many different things to improve our internal processes before we came across Coda. A large part of my work involves marketing, project management, service management and data analytics. For a company like ours, we find Coda the most cost-effective and …
While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use …
I first tried Notion and, although it can be easier to work with for some simple tasks, when it comes to tables and linked data, Coda is more versatile and comprehensive.
For the use we needed in the company, Coda was a way easier and simpler solution. Jira and the Atlassian suite is more complete and structured, but it is was way too complicated.
Coda's automation and flexibility makes it much easier and more interactive than other tools like Airtable. With Airtable, we couldn't get as much traction or flexibility, so we stopped using it after a few months. Jira, on the other hand, has proven to be more helpful for task …
I primarily use Mavenlink for scheduling purposes but with Coda, I'm able to do that, plus have an open way to communicate with the rest of my team when we want to add certain artists to a specific job. Instead of using another software for communicating across all of our …
They are similar but I like that Coda has more templates that are suited for marketing (GTM timelines, pulse updates, etc). One pain point for us is getting the engineering team on Coda but they seem to prefer Jira and Aha!
The price point is most attractive, they have a dedicated team of support agents/doc makers that provide valuable templates, and it really was the best option to fit our current needs as a startup team who will be scaling and the product can scale with us in the long run.
Coda is great to build a place for your users to go to and see information. It is easy to navigate through and the variety of content creation is great. However, it is not always easy to create what you want and there is a lot of playing around and learning. Coda also sometimes misses some functionality which is expected. For example, downloading a list of users that have access to the platform. Being able to send push notifications when a new page has been created etc. Overall it is a good tool to use just be prepared to invest time!
It takes getting used to in terms of how the formulas per column is implemented, in contrast to how we build tables in Excel. For organization/team purchase, it would be worth considering having a training for the core team of users. Right now, we do a lot of self-learning.
Inability to email charts or image without these objects being hosted on a third party. The community has been great in providing workarounds but it would be much more convenient to be able to have such ability natively.
APAC Support. I'm based in Malaysia, due to timezone differences, even with a livechat implemented, the support for each step and conversation takes up to 24 hours per response. Having some hours covered in our timezone would greatly improve customer support experience.
Coda is definitely something that has been proven to drive positive impact in our organization. We have many divisions that can benefit from this that we have yet to explore. It would definitely be worth renewing.
Coda can seem either really useful or really useless. The extremes of both ends is driven by what our own understanding of what we want to implement. If we lack this understanding, it will be easy to misunderstand Coda's usability especially in the wrong context.
We haven't done any integrations - the initial part of our experience we found that for docs with complex formulas, the page tends to load slowly but in recent months, Coda has improved and optimized the loading times in general and we generally don't find any problems in terms of speed anymore.
Mainly due to timezone differences. I think Coda's support in general is well implemented and executed. They know their stuff and are helpful. But since I'm not in the same timezone, solution rates are slower for me, and that's not something I prefer. I work in customer service, too, and more often than not, time is important. Shortening the solution time would be a much greater experience.
I'm relatively inexperienced but this experience is meaningful. It would have been nice to have some guidance from Coda so that we understood more on Coda's purpose and potential.
While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use it in one place. I also appreciate the flexibility of creating your own framework and workflow, unlike in other tools where you have to follow how they capture data and organize projects.
I think scalability is definitely good here since it's based on number of doc makers. Implementation into each dept becomes simpler. That being said, due to the nature of our work, we find it easier that we have a "super user" and then a team of other doc makers. This would make the doc creation and management more efficient.