Wrike and Airtable compete in the project management category, each serving different needs. Wrike focuses on team collaboration and project tracking, providing features like Gantt charts, integration capabilities, and customizable dashboards. Airtable, in contrast, offers flexibility in data management and automation, appealing to users who prioritize ease of use. Wrike appears to have the upper hand in robust project tracking and team collaboration due to its feature-rich environment.
Features: Wrike provides dynamic Gantt charts and real-time task updates for comprehensive project management. It allows for integration with tools like Google Drive and Microsoft Office and offers customizable dashboards to enhance team collaboration. Airtable is valued for its easy-to-use interface and powerful automation capabilities, allowing for the effortless linking of databases and the creation of relational databases. It provides flexibility in data organization, making it ideal for users who need adaptable solutions.
Room for Improvement: Wrike could improve in areas such as Gantt chart printing and mobile interface usability, and users have expressed a need for better budget tracking features. Its cost is perceived as high for small teams. Airtable faces limitations with record size constraints and has been noted to need better export options. Its pricing can be challenging for larger organizations.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Wrike offers deployment flexibility with options across private and public cloud environments, and it receives praise for its responsive support. Airtable also provides private and public cloud options and is similarly recognized for its responsive and knowledgeable customer service, aligning closely with Wrike in user satisfaction.
Pricing and ROI: Wrike employs a subscription model that is seen as costly by some users, particularly larger teams, but its features justify the price with significant productivity gains. Airtable offers more flexible pricing, ranging from a free version to enterprise plans, making it a cost-effective option, especially for smaller teams or personal use. Both tools are noted for contributing to increased efficiency and good ROI, with Wrike excelling in project coordination and Airtable offering affordable data management solutions.
It was effective for easy reporting and data on our user feedback.
Airtable was founded on the belief that software shouldn't dictate how you work – you should dictate how it works. Our mission is to democratize software creation by enabling anyone to build the software tools that meet their needs. Creators and creatives around the world use Airtable to do everything from cattle tracking to filmmaking, and they have great things to say.
Our team brings experience from building and scaling products touching millions of people at Google, Facebook, Salesforce, Microsoft, Dropbox and other leading technology companies. We take pride in our product, and strive hard to provide the best possible experience for you, even if it requires creating new technologies and design paradigms along the way.
Airtable is an independent, private company headquartered in San Francisco. The company has raised over $63 million in funding from notable investors including: CRV, Caffeinated Capital, Freestyle Capital, Data Collective, Founder Collective, CrunchFund, and Box Group.
Wrike is an online collaboration and project management software bringing together centralized task management and social collaboration features into one real-time workspace. It connects tasks, discussions, and emails to your actual project plan. You get an up-to-date picture of the project and can keep your team aligned with your strategy without boring status meetings. Challenges Wrike helps solve:
Main benefits:
Why Wrike?
We monitor all Project Management Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.