Compare social media schedulers

Most scheduler comparisons list features. That is rarely what decides it, because the feature lists overlap far more than the marketing suggests: almost every tool here schedules to the same networks, previews the same posts and reports the same basic numbers.

What actually differs is how you are charged. One tool bills per social channel, another per seat, another per brand or workspace. Two products with an identical entry price can be three times apart by the time you have connected the accounts you actually use. Each comparison below leads with that.

Every comparison

The three pricing models, and why they matter

Every tool on this page uses one of three billing shapes. Working out which one suits how you post is worth more than any feature checklist.

Per channel

You pay for each connected social account. Cheap to start and it scales linearly, so a creator on two networks pays very little and an agency on forty pays a great deal. Buffer is the clearest example.

Per seat

You pay for each person who logs in. Channels are usually generous or unlimited, so this suits a small team running many accounts, and punishes a large team running few. Sprout Social and Hootsuite work this way.

Flat, or per brand

One price covers a bundle of channels and users. Predictable, and usually the cheapest way to run several networks alone or in a pair. Metricool and PostNext sit here.

What each comparison covers

• The real entry price, including the annual discount where one exists, and what the cheapest usable tier actually includes.
• Whether there is a genuine free plan or only a trial, and what the free tier is limited to.
• Who each tool is honestly best for, and where the other one wins instead.
• The alternatives worth looking at if neither of the two fits.

Common questions

Looking for one tool, not two?

A head-to-head only helps once you have narrowed it to two. If you have not, the alternatives directory compares each tool against the whole field instead.