Why consider a Cloudinary alternative?
Cloudinary is well-known for what it was built for: media asset management. Images, video transcoding, thumbnails, GIFs, generate short clips to transform, compress, deliver. But as video takes centre stage in product experiences, many teams are realizing that asset management isn’t the same as video infrastructure.
Thus few might look for alternatives. If your requirements have shifted or you're exploring other options, here are a few reasons why you might consider a different approach:
Built for assets, not full video pipelines: Cloudinary delivers well on its original promise optimize and serve media files fast. But managing video products involves far more than resizing files and caching assets. Upload, transcode, analyze, stream, personalize, monitor these are core parts of the video lifecycle that Cloudinary also have but with few limitation.
Developers often find themselves stitching together third-party tools for video analytics, and AI features just to fill these gaps. But fragmented pipelines mean more integration overhead and more vendor management.
Lack of analytics: Delivering video isn’t the same as knowing how it performs. Cloudinary offers engagement insights such as total views, average watch time, viewer locations, However it lacks QoE insights like startup time, buffering, playback failures, device-specific issues. In 2025, these aren’t nice-to-haves they’re table stakes. Without real-time playback analytics and QoE monitoring, teams are left guessing instead of optimizing.
Limited AI and automation for modern video workflows: Cloudinary has features but they mostly focus on images rather much video. But now teams need to detect NSFW content, auto-generate chapters, enable object search inside video frames, or translate speech across languages. These aren’t edge cases; they’re quickly becoming standard expectations in video products.
Opaque pricing and scalability risks: Cloudinary offers Free, Plus, and Advanced plans but many of the features needed for high-volume use, are only available in the Enterprise tier. This tier isn’t listed on their pricing page and requires a sales conversation to access.
Cloudinary remains a popular choice for teams managing images and videos, especially those with legacy workflows already built around it. But as media pipelines evolve with growing demand for video-first experiences, automation, and AI-powered processing teams increasingly look for flexibility, faster iteration, and clear, predictable pricing.
In this guide, we’ll explore some of the leading alternatives to Cloudinary and how they compare on features, scalability, and developer experience.
1. FastPix
Best for: Teams building video-first products or adding advanced video features into their apps without the hassle of piecing together multiple services. From VOD to low-latency live streaming, playback analytics, AI, and video player infrastructure all handled through a single platform.
Founded: 2023
Known for: End-to-end video and live streaming APIs with integrated AI and real-time QoE insights
Built for: Developers, SaaS platforms, and product teams who need scalable, data-driven, and automation-ready video pipelines
| Feature |
FastPix |
Cloudinary |
Why it Matters |
| Full-Stack Video Pipeline |
✅ No |
❌ No |
FastPix is designed to handle the entire video workflow from upload and transcoding to streaming, video analytics, and AI features within a single platform. Cloudinary provides strong media management capabilities and offers Live Streaming API, but many advanced workflows like real-time QoE monitoring, NSFW or in-video object detection require additional services or custom integration. |
| Live Streaming Support |
✅ No |
✅ No |
FastPix supports low-latency and ultra-low latency live streaming workflows for interactive experiences like sports, auctions, and live commerce. Cloudinary supports live streaming using RTMP input with HLS delivery, including LL-HLS. |
| Video AI Features |
✅ No |
? Limited |
FastPix has built-in AI features such as in-video search, NSFW detection, speech-to-text, named entity recognition, and metadata extraction. Cloudinary offers basic transformations with some AI, mostly focused on images. |
| Transparent Pricing |
✅ No |
❌ No |
FastPix offers public, usage-based pricing. Cloudinary has a tiered model with advanced video features gated behind Enterprise plans requiring sales engagement. |
| Developer-first API |
✅ No |
? Limited |
FastPix is built as a developer-first video API platform with modern SDKs and low setup time. Cloudinary focuses on asset management, better suited for image-heavy workflows. |
| Built-in QoE Analytics |
✅ No |
❌ No |
FastPix provides real-time analytics like startup time, buffering, failures, bitrate shifts, and device-level metrics. Cloudinary provides engagement metrics but lacks QoE analytics. |
| Multi-CDN Delivery |
✅ No |
✅ No (Not for all) |
FastPix includes multi-CDN with automatic failover by default. Cloudinary uses multiple CDNs but restricts multi-CDN access to Enterprise plans. |
| Security |
✅ No |
✅ No |
Both support access control, signed URLs, and token auth. FastPix includes DRM and encryption by default; Cloudinary doesn�t provide DRM. |
| On-the-Fly Transcoding |
✅ No |
✅ No |
Both support JIT encoding, but FastPix offers context-aware encoding optimized for your app. |
Key differences
- Cloudinary is built for media asset management, with strong capabilities in image optimization and video transformations. Its APIs are designed around storage, delivery, and resizing workflows. FastPix, is purpose-built for video products providing developers with unified APIs for upload, encoding, playback, live streaming, analytics, and AI-powered automation. Instead of stitching together services, FastPix offers the full video pipeline out of the box.
- FastPix integrates video, data, and AI in one platform supporting features like speech-to-text, in-video search, NSFW detection, named entity recognition, and video data. Cloudinary offers fewAI features like smart cropping and auto-caption for video. More advanced video-specific automation and playback monitoring generally require additional services.
- Cloudinary’s pricing is tiered, with key features like token-based authentication, SSO, and multi-CDN support gated behind higher plans or Enterprise contracts. FastPix offers transparent, usage-based pricing across all features no gated access or bundled tiers making it easier for teams to start small and scale as their video needs grow.
What users appreciate about FastPix
FastPix stands out for its developer-first approach to video infrastructure. Users value the clean API design, predictable pricing, and the ability to handle video delivery, analytics, and AI features without managing multiple vendors.
- End-to-end video stack: Everything from upload and encoding to streaming, playback, AI, and analytics available through one API, built for production teams.
- Transparent pricing: Clear usage-based pricing with no surprises or gated enterprise features.
- Actionable video data: Real-time playback analytics and engagement insights help product teams improve user experience and optimize performance.
What users find challenging about FastPix
FastPix is API-first and infrastructure-focused, which means it’s built for developers who want control over the video stack not for those looking for a ready-made CMS or drag-and-drop solution.
There’s a learning curve in designing your own workflows, but this also gives flexibility to build exactly what your product needs.
2. Gumlet
Best for: Teams that need fast, optimized video delivery and live streaming with minimal setup. Gumlet focuses on simplifying video workflows handling everything from VOD to live streaming, packaging, and multi-device playback without requiring deep infrastructure management.
Founded: 2019
Best known for: Video and image delivery optimization with just-in-time packaging and live streaming support
Useful for: Developers, publishers, SaaS teams, and businesses that prioritize fast, reliable media delivery with easy integration
Gumlet vs. Cloudinary
| Feature |
Gumlet |
Cloudinary |
Why it matters |
| Image and Video Optimization |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both platforms offer resizing and optimization. Gumlet tunes its delivery for smooth, adaptive playback across devices. |
| Live Streaming Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support live streaming, but Gumlet emphasizes low-complexity setup and easy integration for live workflows. |
| Adaptive Bitrate Streaming |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both offer adaptive streaming. Gumlet provides just-in-time packaging and bandwidth-aware delivery to improve playback. |
| AI-Powered Features |
❌ No AI features |
? Limited |
Cloudinary includes some AI for cropping and auto-captioning. Gumlet focuses purely on optimization and delivery, not AI. |
| Pricing Transparency |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Gumlet s pricing is usage-based and public. Cloudinary s advanced features require enterprise plans and sales conversations. |
| Developer APIs and SDKs |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both offer APIs. Gumlet focuses on fast media delivery and playback integration. Cloudinary is broader but image-focused. |
| Multi-CDN Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Gumlet provides multi-CDN delivery by default for better regional performance. Cloudinary offers this at higher plan levels. |
| Security and Access Control |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both platforms support secure video delivery with token-based access and signed URLs. |
Key differences
- Gumlet focuses on getting your video (and images) delivered quickly and reliably, whether it’s on-demand or live. Cloudinary remains stronger on the image side and basic video handling but feels limited for playback-focused video products.
- Gumlet’s usage-based pricing gives teams the flexibility to start small and scale up without worrying about locked features or unpredictable costs. Cloudinary’s pricing can become complex as your video usage grows.
- Gumlet doesn’t offer AI features. But for teams that don’t need video intelligence and just want playback performance, that simplicity is part of the appeal.
What users appreciate about Gumlet
- Smooth playback out of the box: Device-aware delivery, just-in-time packaging, and adaptive streaming ensure fast, reliable video performance.
- Easy live streaming setup: RTMP ingest with HLS delivery makes going live straightforward, without needing to stitch together separate services.
- Transparent pricing: Usage-based pricing without enterprise gatekeeping means you can forecast costs and scale confidently.
What users find challenging about Gumlet
- No AI-powered video features: If your workflows depend on speech-to-text, in-video search, or automated tagging, you’ll need to bring in other tools.
- Playback analytics are basic: Gumlet offers engagement stats and delivery metrics but not deep QoE insights like startup time, buffering, or device-specific playback health.
3. Vidyard
Best for: Sales, marketing, and customer success teams that use video to drive engagement, generate leads, and personalize communication without writing a single line of code.
Founded: 2010
Best known for: Personalized video messaging, video marketing tools, lead capture, and engagement tracking
Useful for: Sales teams, marketers, internal comms, and customer success teams not engineering or product teams building video infrastructure
Vidyard vs. Cloudinary
| Feature |
Vidyard |
Cloudinary |
Why it matters |
| Video Hosting & Playback |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both provide video hosting, but Vidyard focuses on ease-of-use for non-technical teams, while Cloudinary focuses on developer APIs. |
| Lead Generation Tools |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Vidyard is built for lead capture with in-player forms and CRM sync. Cloudinary doesnt offer marketing automation features. |
| Personalized Video Messaging |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Vidyard allows users to record, personalize, and send video messages directly to prospects Cloudinary doesnt offer this use case. |
| Developer API Access |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both provide APIs, but Vidyards are limited to uploading and playback. Cloudinary has broader asset management APIs, but neither is built for complex infrastructure. |
| AI or Video Intelligence |
❌ No |
? Limited |
Cloudinary offers some AI-driven features. Vidyard focuses on engagement tools, not video intelligence or AI processing. |
| Live Streaming Support |
❌ No |
✅ Yes |
Cloudinary supports live streaming. Vidyard is focused purely on VOD and personalized recordingsno live workflows. |
| Playback Analytics |
✅ Yes |
? Limited (basic engagement metrics) |
Vidyard provides detailed viewer-level analytics, including watch time and drop-off points. Cloudinary offers basic usage stats. |
| Monetization Features |
❌ No |
❌ No |
Neither platform is built for direct monetization like subscriptions or pay-per-view. |
| Pricing Transparency |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Vidyard offers clear pricing tiers on its site. Cloudinarys pricing for advanced video features requires direct sales engagement. |
Key differences
- Vidyard is built for salespeople, marketers, and customer success teams who want to use video as a communication and engagement tool. Cloudinary is built for developers managing assets. Neither is designed for video product infrastructure like live streaming pipelines or AI-driven automation.
- Vidyard helps teams generate leads and build relationships through video emails, landing pages, and CRM-connected forms something Cloudinary doesn’t attempt to do.
- Vidyard intentionally avoids live streaming and AI-powered video features. Its strength is engagement and sales-oriented workflows, not media infrastructure.
What users appreciate about Vidyard
- Fast, easy video creation for sales and marketing: Record and send videos without production overhead, directly embedded into email or CRM workflows.
- Lead generation built-in: Use in-player forms and calls-to-action to turn viewers into leads and sync directly with CRM tools like HubSpot, Salesforce, and Marketo.
- Actionable viewer insights: Engagement heatmaps and viewer tracking give teams the data they need to follow up effectively.
What users find challenging about Vidyard
No live streaming or video infrastructure: Vidyard doesn’t offer live streaming, complex encoding, or playback optimization. If your product requires scalable video delivery, Vidyard won’t meet those needs.
- Limited developer flexibility: APIs exist for uploads and playback but are not meant for building custom video workflows or integrating into complex platforms.
4. Wowza
Best for: Teams and organizations that need reliable, low-latency live streaming and encoding infrastructure with deep configurability. Wowza is known for its streaming server roots and continues to focus on live broadcast-grade video delivery.
Founded: 2005
Best known for: Streaming infrastructure, live streaming servers, low-latency delivery, encoder compatibility
Useful for: Broadcasters, event platforms, sports streaming, and engineering teams who need control over live workflows and latency tuning
Wowza vs. Cloudinary
| Feature |
Wowza |
Cloudinary |
Why it matters |
| Live Streaming Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Wowza supports multiple ingest protocols and low-latency delivery. Cloudinary offers basic live streaming via RTMP. |
| On-Demand Video Hosting |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both platforms provide VOD hosting, but Wowza is primarily live-first while Cloudinary focuses on media storage. |
| Ultra-Low Latency (ULL) |
? |
❌ No |
Wowza enables sub-2-second latency using WebRTC and LL-HLS, critical for interactive use cases. |
| Adaptive Bitrate Streaming |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support adaptive streaming. Wowza provides deeper configurability on encoding profiles. |
| AI or Video Intelligence |
❌ No |
✅ Yes |
Cloudinary offers smart cropping and auto-captioning. Wowza focuses on delivery and streamingnot AI automation. |
| Playback Analytics |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Wowza provides streaming performance metrics. Cloudinary offers basic engagement metrics, not playback health insights. |
| Monetization Features |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Wowza supports ad insertion, pay-per-view, and subscription models. Cloudinary does not offer direct monetization tools. |
| Pricing Transparency |
❌ No |
❌ No |
Both require sales engagement for enterprise pricing. Pricing details for advanced features are not publicly available. |
Key differences
- Wowza is purpose-built for live video delivery and streaming infrastructure. Cloudinary handles live, but it was designed for asset management—not broadcast-grade streaming.
- Wowza supports ultra-low latency workflows using WebRTC and LL-HLS, which makes it a preferred choice for auctions, sports, betting, and real-time commerce. Cloudinary does not offer this level of latency control.
- Wowza does not offer AI-powered features like in-video search or metadata tagging. But it delivers highly configurable encoding, delivery, and monetization pipelines for live and VOD.
What users appreciate about Wowza
- Reliable live streaming with flexibility: Broad protocol support (RTMP, SRT, HLS, WebRTC) and encoder compatibility make Wowza a go-to for event and broadcast teams.
- Low-latency options: Enables sub-2-second delivery, essential for interactive experiences.
- Monetization features included: Supports server-side ad insertion, pay-per-view, and subscription models out of the box.
What users find challenging about Wowza
No AI video intelligence: If your project depends on AI tagging, speech-to-text, or in-video search, you’ll need to integrate additional tools.
- Opaque pricing for enterprise features: Like Cloudinary, Wowza requires sales engagement for custom quotes. Transparent, usage-based pricing is not available.
Dacast
Best for: Businesses and broadcasters that need affordable live streaming, video hosting, and built-in monetization tools like pay-per-view and subscriptions without the complexity of custom development.
Founded: 2008
Best known for: Live streaming and video hosting with integrated monetization features
Useful for: Broadcasters, event organizers, education platforms, faith-based streaming, and businesses looking for quick, monetized video delivery without engineering-heavy setup
Dacast vs. Cloudinary:
| Feature |
Dacast |
Cloudinary |
Why it matters |
| Live Streaming Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support live streaming. Dacast focuses on simplicity and monetization for live events. |
| On-Demand Video Hosting |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both provide VOD hosting. Dacast emphasizes ease of use and monetization for pre-recorded content. |
| Monetization Features |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Dacast offers pay-per-view, subscription, and ad-supported models natively. Cloudinary does not support monetization. |
| Ultra-Low Latency (ULL) |
❌ No |
❌ No |
Neither platform provides ultra-low latency workflows. |
| Adaptive Bitrate Streaming |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support adaptive streaming for smooth playback across bandwidth conditions. |
| AI or Video Intelligence |
❌ No |
✅ Yes |
Cloudinary includes AI features like smart cropping and auto-captioning. Dacast does not offer video AI. |
| Developer APIs and SDKs |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both offer APIs. Dacast focuses on hosting, monetization, and playback; Cloudinary focuses on asset management. |
| Playback Analytics |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Dacast provides viewer engagement and monetization performance analytics. Cloudinary offers basic usage stats. |
| Pricing Transparency |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Dacast provides clear, published pricing plans. Cloudinary requires sales engagement for enterprise pricing. |
| Multi-CDN Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support multi-CDN delivery. Cloudinary offers this at higher-tier plans. |
Key differences
- Monetization built-in: Dacast makes pay-per-view, subscription, and ad-based monetization simple with native tools no third-party integrations required. Cloudinary doesn’t offer any monetization features.
- Quick event-focused workflows: Dacast is designed for broadcasters, educators, and event organizers who need easy-to-use live and VOD streaming. Cloudinary focuses on asset management, not event delivery.
- Transparent, accessible pricing: Dacast publishes its pricing plans, making it easier for smaller businesses and nonprofits to plan without negotiation. Cloudinary keeps advanced video features behind enterprise plans and gated tiers.
What users appreciate about Dacast
- Fast setup for live and on-demand streaming: Stream events or host videos quickly through a simple, intuitive dashboard.
- Built-in monetization options: Easily configure pay-per-view, subscriptions, or ad revenue streams without additional tools.
- Clear, upfront pricing: Self-serve options and transparent plans make it accessible for small to mid-sized teams.
What users find challenging about Dacast
- No AI-powered features: If your use case includes speech-to-text, in-video search, or smart tagging, Dacast won’t meet those needs.
- Limited for complex developer workflows: Dacast’s APIs are more focused on getting you live or hosted quickly not building highly customized infrastructure.
Brightcove
Best for: Large enterprises and media companies managing complex video workflows, global content distribution, and monetization at scale. Brightcove offers a full-stack video platform with CMS, OTT solutions, and enterprise-grade security.
Founded: 2004
Best known for: Enterprise video platform with branded players, monetization tools, and global distribution infrastructure
Useful for: Broadcasters, media companies, publishers, and global brands with high-volume video needs and structured workflows
Brightcove vs. Cloudinary
| Feature |
Brightcove |
Cloudinary |
Why it matters |
| Live Streaming Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support live streaming. Brightcove offers live event features, DVR support, and multi-CDN delivery. |
| On-Demand Video Hosting |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both provide VOD hosting. Brightcove includes video CMS tools for large content libraries. |
| Monetization Features |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Brightcove supports ad-based monetization, paywalls, and subscription models. Cloudinary does not support monetization. |
| Ultra-Low Latency (ULL) |
❌ No |
❌ No |
Neither provides ultra-low latency workflows like sub-2-second delivery. |
| Adaptive Bitrate Streaming |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support adaptive streaming for smooth playback. Brightcove offers deep control over profiles and delivery options. |
| AI or Video Intelligence |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both offer AI-powered features. Brightcove includes AI metadata tools like content classification and clip generation. |
| Developer APIs and SDKs |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both platforms provide APIs. Brightcoves APIs focus on CMS, playback, and monetization workflows. |
| Playback Analytics |
✅ Yes |
❌ No |
Brightcove provides detailed QoE analytics, viewer engagement, and monetization reporting. Cloudinary offers basic usage stats. |
| Pricing Transparency |
❌ No |
❌ No |
Both require sales engagement for enterprise pricing. Pricing is not published for advanced features. |
| Multi-CDN Support |
✅ Yes |
✅ Yes |
Both support multi-CDN delivery. Brightcove includes this in its enterprise offering; Cloudinary reserves it for higher tiers. |
Key differences
- Brightcove is built for global media companies managing large video libraries, monetization pipelines, and OTT apps. Cloudinary focuses on asset delivery and transformations not enterprise-grade video infrastructure.
- Brightcove supports advertising, paywalls, and subscriptions directly within the platform. Cloudinary does not offer monetization tools or CMS workflows.
- Brightcove provides real-time analytics on playback performance, viewer engagement, and ad monetization. Cloudinary only offers basic usage metrics like views and bandwidth.
What users appreciate about Brightcove
- End-to-end enterprise video management: Combines hosting, live streaming, monetization, and analytics in one platform.
- Built-in monetization options: Supports ad-based revenue models, subscriptions, and pay-per-view without third-party integrations.
- Global reach with multi-CDN: Ensures reliable content delivery at scale across different geographies.
What users find challenging about Brightcove
- Complex setup for small teams: Brightcove is designed for enterprise use cases and may feel heavy for smaller projects or startups.
- Opaque pricing: Pricing details are not public. Most features require sales engagement and are often bundled into enterprise packages.
- Not developer-first: Brightcove focuses on pre-built solutions and workflows. For teams looking to build custom video products via APIs, flexibility can feel limited.
Why FastPix?
We won’t pretend we’re unbiased but here’s why FastPix is a better choice than Cloudinary if you care about video:
One API that’s actually built for video. Upload, process, stream, and analyze without duct-taping image tools for video use cases.
No video hacks, no workarounds. Adaptive streaming, in-video AI, real-time playback analytics all supported out of the box.
Straightforward pricing. No hidden fees. No guessing what your bill will be.
Want to see how it works? Try FastPix for free and start building today.
.png)
.png)
