Contentful vs. zeroheight

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
zeroheight
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
zeroheight helps teams create, manage and maintain their design systems. Using zeroheight, designers, engineers, and product teams can collaborate and build design systems that can be easily shared across teams.
$49
month
Pricing
Contentfulzeroheight
Editions & Modules
Lite
$300
per month
Community
Free
Enterprise
Custom
Starter
$49
month
Enterprise
Custom Pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Contentfulzeroheight
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
YesNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Contentfulzeroheight
Features
Contentfulzeroheight
Security
Comparison of Security features of Product A and Product B
Contentful
8.5
10 Ratings
4% above category average
zeroheight
-
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
zeroheight
-
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
0% above category average
zeroheight
-
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
23% above category average
zeroheight
-
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
Contentfulzeroheight
Small Businesses
ManageWP
ManageWP
Score 10.0 out of 10
Square 9 Softworks
Square 9 Softworks
Score 9.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
MSB Docs
MSB Docs
Score 9.4 out of 10
Enterprises
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
Tungsten Capture
Tungsten Capture
Score 8.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Contentfulzeroheight
Likelihood to Recommend
8.3
(13 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Contentfulzeroheight
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
zeroheight
For creating and maintaining a component library, it is a fantastic tool that creates an interface between Developers, UX Engineers and Designers. It is easy to get both general information about a component, but also incredibly detailed information when looking at the component on a pixel-level, where information on paddings, margins, colors, fonts etc. can be easily accessed.
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
zeroheight
  • showcasing components and other topics
  • ease of seeing detailed information on components (colors, paddings, sizes etc.)
  • ease of finding information
  • possibility of going to previous versions of the design guideline
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
zeroheight
  • when opening a component image (which opens a new page where the detailed information like paddings and colors are shown), the zoom can only be done by buttons, I'd prefer to be able to use my mouse scroll and for vertical / horizontal scrolling to do ctrl+scroll or ctrl+shift+scroll or something like that
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
zeroheight
No answers on this topic
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
zeroheight
I have used and still use Sketch and Zeplin too, but they serve other purposes for us. Sketch is used to design the components themselves and they are then exported to Zeroheight where they are showcased and enriched with textual information. Zeplin is used to design application pages, and again the components are exported to Zeplin from Sketch. But Zeroheight is mainly used for the development of the components themselves as well as a documentation for our design guideline in general. It is also used by us for design tokens and patterns, as well as other information on the design guideline, so if someone wants to understand the "why" of a design decision, the explanation can be usually found in Zeroheight too.
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
zeroheight
  • increased quality, as less misunderstandings or communication problems occur
  • increased speed of development, as it is a single source of truth for us. The developer can rely on the information in Zeroheight being correct so that he doesn't have to iterate his code again and again.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Contentful Screenshots

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