GoFeed vs Loomly: closed packages against workspace quotas

What each one buys you

The two look alike on the visible part. There is a calendar, you schedule on it, somebody can review before anything goes out and there are analytics on top. The comparison starts when you look at how the thing you bought is counted, because that is where the two tools make opposite decisions, and that decision is what shows up on next year's invoice.

Not one cell in that table is a judgement. The Loomly column comes from its own plans page and the right hand one from this product's module catalogue. Read "not stated" as exactly what it says: Loomly's pricing page does not mention it, which is not the same as an accusation.

What Loomly costs today

Loomly publishes two self serve tiers and one built to order. Each carries a number of social profiles and a number of users, and calendars are unlimited on every plan, which is a good detail and a rare one.

Prices checked on 8 September 2026: Loomly.

Annual billing lands 25 % below monthly on both published tiers, and the page itself warns that sales tax may apply depending on your billing address. The trial asks for no card.

The jump, told with a real agency

Take an agency of four people with five clients, each client on three connected networks. That is 15 social profiles and four people doing the work. It is a small agency, not even a mid sized one, and it already fails to fit into Starter on both sides at once: three profiles too many and one person too many.

The way out is Beyond, which multiplies what you were paying by five in order to hand you 60 profiles and unlimited users. That agency will use 15 of the 60. It is not paying for features it needs, it is paying for the distance between two tiers, and that is the complaint you hear most from people who leave: not that anything is missing inside the package, but that the next package sits so far above.

There is a simple way to check whether the jump is coming for you before you sign anything. Count the profiles you will have in a year rather than the ones you have today, and add up the people who genuinely need to log in, including the ones who only look. If either of those two numbers sits less than one client away from your tier's ceiling, the jump is already bought and you are only waiting for the renewal date.

What makes it worse is that the two ceilings fill up along different paths. Profiles grow when you sign a client, seats grow when you hire or when somebody joins for a season. A model that ties both to the same tier makes you jump on whichever fills first, even when the other one is still half empty.

Here the sum works differently, because the unit is the workspace. The limits belong to the whole workspace rather than to each person, so adding somebody for three summer months does not change the fee, and taking them off in September does not either. There are five quotas and four of them are hard ceilings: members, storage, connected accounts and ad accounts. The fifth is the contacts reached by the DM automation, the only soft one, with a ceiling on the entry tier and none above it. The current figures live on the pricing page, which reads the live catalogue.

Who gives the yes

Loomly has an approval flow with roles and it has it from Starter, which deserves credit without qualification: this is not a feature held back for the expensive tier. The difference is not whether approval exists, it is who can give the yes.

Here one yes is enough, and it can come from either side. For a client with approvals switched on, a post waits for a single approval, whichever comes first: somebody on your team from the app, or the client, who signs into their own portal, sees exactly what is going to be published, and either approves it or sends it back with a comment attached to the piece. There is no order and it is never both, and either way it leaves a record of who said yes and when. For a client who does not need to review, posts are scheduled straight away.

The client's side needs the portal, which is an agency workspace feature. An in house workspace with its own team has no third party to ask, so every post waits for one teammate's approval. A creator workspace has no approvals, and that is the right answer: approving your own work is a form, not a control. How the whole thing is set up is on the approvals page.

The question almost nobody asks when comparing is what it costs to invite the client to look. In a model that counts users by package, every person on the client side who wants to review before publishing uses one of the seats you bought for your own team. When that stings, approval quietly leaves the tool and goes back to email, which was precisely the problem you were trying to solve.

What happens after the post goes out

An agency does not finish its work when the piece is published. After that there is a report to send and an invoice to issue, and those two usually live in tools other than the one that schedules.

The monthly PDF report that sends itself is an agency workspace feature; the per network analytics are available to everyone, on six networks, with around thirty metrics documented next to their aggregation rule. That rule matters more than the network count: reach cannot be summed across days, engagement rate is recalculated from the period totals, and demographics exist on Instagram and YouTube only.

The commercial block is agency only too, and it is where the comparison stops being a comparison, because Loomly does not play there. Briefs, quotes with a share link, contracts with line items, and invoices with your own numbering series, eight VAT regimes, the Spanish VAT categories, and IRPF withholding, the income tax retained on Spanish invoices. For an agency operating in Spain that is not an extra, it is half the month. The wider field of options is in the Loomly alternatives round up.

What Loomly does better

Four concrete things, and all four are legitimate reasons to stay where you are.

The first is its post ideas. Loomly does not leave you staring at a blank calendar: it suggests what to post about, with dates, themes and hooks, and it does that better than any list of templates. If your real bottleneck is that on Monday you do not know what to say, that is worth more than half a dozen features we do have.

The second is the approval flow with roles already in the entry plan. Most of the market keeps approvals for the second or third tier and Loomly does not. A team that approves a lot and runs few brands finds a price to feature ratio there that is hard to beat.

The third is the chat based AI assistant included on every plan. There is no equivalent here and it is worth saying plainly: this product does not write content for you. What it offers is a door for your own assistant to act on your workspace with your permissions, which is a different thing and solves different tasks.

The fourth is commercial policy. A 25 % discount for annual billing and a 50 % lifetime discount for non profit organisations that provide documentation, plus unlimited calendars on every plan. That last one looks minor and is not: it means you can separate work by client without being charged for the privilege.

The reasonable conclusion is not that one always replaces the other. If you run few brands, approve a lot internally and your bottleneck is the idea, Loomly is well built for that. If between you and the publish button there is a client who has to say yes from their own login, and behind it an invoice with your series and your VAT rate, then you are comparing two different categories of tool and the package price is only the first symptom. The same contrast with a marketing calendar on the other side is in GoFeed against CoSchedule.