Softr Reviews & Ratings

4.5/5

“Affordable Pricing with Scalability Limitations”

Starting with Softr was budget-friendly and ideal for my initial project scope. However, as demands increased, I faced challenges with scalability, prompting me to explore other platforms that could better accommodate growth.

Pros : Softr offers a range of pricing plans, including a generous free tier, making it accessible for small projects and startups.

Cons : As my project grew, I encountered scalability limitations, particularly with data handling and user management, which required considering alternative solutions.

Switched from : Bubble

Reason to switch : Needed a platform capable of supporting larger-scale applications with enhanced scalability.

4.5/5

“Better than spreadsheets, less burden than full dev”

Before Softr we managed project data in Google Sheets, but user access, filtering and mobile friendliness were weak. Softr bridged that gap: improved UI, better access control, but still very manageable.

Pros : For clinics, nonprofits, small business, this is the perfect balance between ease of use and personalization.

Cons : It doesn’t allow direct publishing to the Apple App Store or Google Play Store, so your app will not be available to many app-store users.

Switched from : Airtable

Reason to switch : Airtable was powerful for data but lacked UI and user-portal features; Softr gave front-end access quickly.

4.5/5

“Responsive to Community Feedback”

I appreciate how the Softr team listens to user feedback and implements requested features. However, I sometimes find the customization options limited due to the basic nature of the content blocks.

Pros : Softr is known for incorporating features requested by the community, demonstrating their commitment to user satisfaction.

Cons : The blocks offer only a basic level of flexibility, limiting customization.

Switched from : Quickbase

Reason to switch : Needed more advanced customization options for my project.

4.5/5

“Connects our spreadsheets to an app with minimal effort”

We used Google Sheets for client intake and tracking, but it looked amateur. Softr let us connect our sheet and turn it into a sleek portal with user access. The look and feel improved dramatically.

Pros : I appreciate that Softr functions like a spreadsheet while simultaneously allowing me to create a front end.

Cons : The platform is rela¬tively easy to use but you’re limited to certain customizations.

Switched from : Google AppSheet

Reason to switch : AppSheet worked, but customization felt limited and the interface was clunky; Softr gave cleaner visuals and faster build.

4.5/5

“Our internal HR tracker built in a weekend”

HR needed a vacation tracker, equipment checkout system and new-hire portal. I built it in Softr over the weekend. The system works; staff use it. It didn’t replace our full HRIS, but it solved a critical need fast.

Pros : This platform is excellent for teams or individuals who lack a dedicated tech person.

Cons : You absolutely need to bring an external database, you just simply can’t build your app with one.

Switched from : OutSystems

Reason to switch : The HR software we had was expensive and rigid; Softr gave rapid flexibility and lower cost.

4.5/5

“Templates and integrations made our build smooth”

I needed a vendor portal. Using Softr’s template and connecting to our Airtable backend, I added login, user roles and content blocks. The integration with Zapier made it plug into our systems effortlessly.

Pros : Its templates, AI builder, and drag-and-drop interface make it an attractive option for non-technical users.

Cons : I wish it were easier to find the knowledge base when I need assistance.

Switched from : Webflow

Reason to switch : Webflow looked great but required more backend setup; Softr provided the backend-frontend integration out of the box.

4.5/5

“Excellent support, fast iteration, great for agencies”

I run a small no-code agency and used Softr for a client portal. I appreciate how fast I could iterate and get client feedback. The support was responsive.

Pros : Our company built the Creator portal on Softr and has already saved us hours of back-and-forth.

Cons : Technical issues took weeks to resolve.

Switched from : Webflow + Memberstack

Reason to switch : Webflow + Memberstack felt fragmented and required multiple tools; Softr integrated UI, user management and data in one place.

4.5/5

“Good value but licensing edges up as you grow”

We started on the free tier for our internal tool; it worked so well we upgraded. The cost is less than custom dev, but I’m aware that as we add users/modules the price climbs.

Pros : Free version has impressive functionality and good entry value.

Cons : I find Softr too expensive.

Switched from : Quickbase

Reason to switch : The website builder was inexpensive but lacked data integrations; Softr gave more capability even if cost is a little higher.

4.3/5

“Limited Customization for Complex Applications”

For simple projects, Softr was a great choice. However, as I aimed to build more intricate applications, the platform's constraints became apparent, leading me to seek alternatives with greater customization capabilities.

Pros : Softr's drag-and-drop interface and pre-built templates made it easy to launch a basic web app quickly.

Cons : When attempting to develop more complex applications, I found Softr's customization options limited, particularly in backend flexibility and advanced feature integration.

Switched from : Obviously AI

Reason to switch : Required a platform offering extensive customization and advanced development features.

4.3/5

“Mobile App Development Constraints”

While developing a PWA with Softr was straightforward, the inability to create native mobile apps was a significant drawback, especially when aiming to provide a seamless mobile user experience.

Pros : Softr allowed me to create a Progressive Web App (PWA) that functioned adequately on mobile browsers.

Cons : The lack of support for fully native mobile applications limited the app's performance and user experience on mobile devices.

Switched from : Quixy

Reason to switch : Needed to develop fully native mobile applications to enhance performance and user engagement.