Contentful vs. Paligo

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Contentful
Score 7.5 out of 10
N/A
Contentful is a cloud based CMS solution that provides the ability to manage content across multiple platforms.The editing interface allows for managing content interactively and provides developers the ability to deliver the content with the programming language and template framework of their choice.
$0
Paligo
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
Paligo, headquartered in Stockholm, offers their component content management system (CCMS), supporting the creation and publishing of technical documentation and help systems.
$4,800
per year per seat
Pricing
ContentfulPaligo
Editions & Modules
Lite
$300
per month
Community
Free
Enterprise
Custom
Professional
from $4800
per year
Business
Contact Sales
per year
Enterprise
Contact Sales
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ContentfulPaligo
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
YesYes
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ContentfulPaligo
Considered Both Products
Contentful

No answer on this topic

Paligo
Features
ContentfulPaligo
Security
Comparison of Security features of Product A and Product B
Contentful
8.5
10 Ratings
3% above category average
Paligo
-
Ratings
Role-based user permissions8.510 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform & Infrastructure
Comparison of Platform & Infrastructure features of Product A and Product B
Contentful
9.5
12 Ratings
20% above category average
Paligo
-
Ratings
API9.311 Ratings00 Ratings
Internationalization / multi-language9.79 Ratings00 Ratings
Web Content Creation
Comparison of Web Content Creation features of Product A and Product B
Contentful
7.8
13 Ratings
1% above category average
Paligo
-
Ratings
WYSIWYG editor7.34 Ratings00 Ratings
Code quality / cleanliness9.58 Ratings00 Ratings
Admin section9.311 Ratings00 Ratings
Page templates7.64 Ratings00 Ratings
Library of website themes7.52 Ratings00 Ratings
Mobile optimization / responsive design4.57 Ratings00 Ratings
Publishing workflow9.312 Ratings00 Ratings
Form generator7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Web Content Management
Comparison of Web Content Management features of Product A and Product B
Contentful
9.4
12 Ratings
24% above category average
Paligo
-
Ratings
Content taxonomy10.011 Ratings00 Ratings
SEO support10.09 Ratings00 Ratings
Bulk management9.08 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability / breadth of extensions9.08 Ratings00 Ratings
Community / comment management9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ContentfulPaligo
Small Businesses
ManageWP
ManageWP
Score 10.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ContentfulPaligo
Likelihood to Recommend
8.3
(13 ratings)
9.4
(31 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(3 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(3 ratings)
8.2
(24 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.9
(26 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ContentfulPaligo
Likelihood to Recommend
Contentful
It's a great all rounder for content projects. It's easy in the basics and powerful in the complex, data heavy scenarios. Extending the platform is straightforward and the SDK gives you everything you need. If you have many many varying content types , it gets expensive and perhaps not the best choice .
Read full review
Paligo
Paligo is particularly well suited for developing similar document sets for multiple products or product lines. It is not a page layout application, so don't expect the same capabilities as popular applications for graphics-heavy documentation. With some up-front time developing good layouts, however, Paligo does manage to create very usable PDF output for customer-facing documents.
Read full review
Pros
Contentful
  • Flexible. This CMS can be easily extended and provide access to dynamic content
  • Simple. The WYSWG is very easy to work with and identifying pages and content in the system is fairly easy
  • Clean Interface. The interface is clean and uncluttered keeping focus on the content and not other factors.
Read full review
Paligo
  • The review mode is super convenient. Comparing a snapshot of the previous versions with the current one clearly outlines the respective changes and reduces the necessary content to review tremendously.
  • The option to reuse text fragments is another handy feature. Text fragments will be updated whenever the original text fragment is altered is also extremely helpful.
  • Managing a content's structure was never easier. An intuitive drag & drop functionality allows you to design your document's structure however you like.
  • You can also fork content, in addition to reuse text fragments. This is another helpful option that no longer requires you to create repetetive chapters over and over.
Read full review
Cons
Contentful
  • Contentful uses "references" to allow you to build very modular content. If I have a "slider" content type, I can create a "slide" content type which references a "button" content type, and so forth. This works well, but I occasionally wish there was a better solution for one-off content, like a settings page. Currently, this is done for creating an entire content type called "settings" with a single entry. Not a big deal, but not ideal, either.
  • There are a few quirks with GatsbyJS integration, etc, but these issues are being fixed and improved upon very quickly.
  • A minor gripe, but Contentful does not have a way to organize fields within an entry. Entries with many fields are somewhat tiresome to scroll through.
Read full review
Paligo
  • The amount of CSS/JS required to customize a site's appearance can be cumbersome
  • Product documentation can be lacking, specifically with integrations; in some cases, support offered no real help when trying to solve a problem with an integrated service
  • Some features require extensive development experience to use, which can sometimes be an obstacle to less-experienced team members
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Contentful
No answers on this topic
Paligo
Paligo single-sources beautifully. Allows for customization. Has the best translation features. Has the best support services.
Read full review
Usability
Contentful
It is a very easy to use and configure application. I find that it is on the user to manage the content after the models have been created, yet I still do not encounter issues finding or creating new components for our site. It is easy to set up and easy to navigate.
Read full review
Paligo
Generally, I'm very happy with Paligo and the productivity gains that I get from using it. There are a few arbitrary limitations on structure, and when applying conditional formatting, that I don't really understand. Unlinking / editing reused text uses this broadly inscrutible colour-coding that I just hate. It would be nice to double-click a component, make edits, then respond to a popup asking if I want to confirm the edit for all linked content, or unlink this instance. Likewise converting from an informal topic insertion to duplicates of its raw contents.
Read full review
Support Rating
Contentful
No answers on this topic
Paligo
All the support requests I've submitted have been resolved in one way or another. Sometimes it takes some back and forth, which is to be expected. This is where being on a different continent becomes a drawback. Since we became Enterprise users, we've also had an additional level of help and support from a dedicated account manager in the US, and the resolutions seem to come more quickly
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Contentful
No answers on this topic
Paligo
Everything went well
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Contentful
Easy to use and much more organized as a single platform versus multi. The layout is clean and easy to read and we don’t have to worry about certain users safe guarding data or content then losing it when they leave the company. It’s a one stop shop for imagery
Read full review
Paligo
We moved from Flare to Paligo. One of the main reasons was the fact that Paligo is a cloud product. Collaboration with anyone outside of our team was more difficult with Flare. Also, maintaining a server for Flare content was going to become an issue, and overall I felt the Flare desktop product was prone to errors and issues. The flexibility of assigning Paligo licenses was a huge factor, as was the stability of the cloud platform.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Contentful
  • Contentful has saved us valuable development time that was previously spent doing deploys for minor content updates.
  • Contentful has helped us maintain consistent documentation, reducing time needed to review for consistency.
  • Can't say we've really experienced any negative ROI impacts from using Contentful, but we've run into some limitations in adding too many content models and the next pricing tier is substantially more expensive.
Read full review
Paligo
  • I am not involved in the financial decisions for my company regarding Paligo; the decision to migrate our content to this environment predates my hiring. However, I know that the migration effort from WordPress to Paligo was an initially heavy lift, but any content migration effort would be. I believe that ultimately, getting our content out of WordPress was a positive move, and I look forward to seeing what Paligo will help us accomplish in the future. Sorry, no hard numbers from me. :)
Read full review
ScreenShots

Contentful Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of

Paligo Screenshots

Screenshot of branching in PaligoScreenshot of conditional filters in PaligoScreenshot of the contributor editor in PaligoScreenshot of some of the integration options in PaligoScreenshot of the main editor in PaligoScreenshot of multi-channel publishing options in Paligo