GoFeed vs Wayfront: selling packaged services or running the feeds

What each column covers

Wayfront started life as Service Provider Pro and the inheritance shows everywhere: it is built for a catalogue of fixed price services that somebody buys through a form. GoFeed is built for the work that never ends, the work of publishing every week on somebody else's behalf. Both have a portal, tasks and invoices, and that is where the resemblance stops.

That table does not say one is better. It says that if your business is selling closed packages, one of those columns is nearly empty where it matters to you, and if your business is running feeds, the empty one is the other. Most agencies comparing these two do both in different proportions, and the useful question is which half eats more of the week.

What Wayfront costs

Wayfront publishes its ladder in dollars and orders it by team seats, with storage growing alongside. Clients and projects are unlimited on every plan, which is an important design decision: the thing that grows with you is your team, not your client list.

Prices checked on 8 September 2026: Wayfront.

Two costs sit on top of that base and belong in the arithmetic. Extra seats on the Pro plan cost $20 a month each, or $18 billed annually, and the integration API add on costs $300 a month, or $240 annually. What is not there is a commission of their own on your takings: the money goes straight through Stripe, and that absence is worth real cash in a business that invoices its services through the platform.

One detail of the ladder decides a lot of comparisons: full white label reseller mode and the advanced integrations live on Pro. The entry plan keeps the branded portal, which is already a lot, but not the resale. If that is exactly what you are shopping for, the map of what each vendor calls white label runs through the SuiteDash comparison, which sits at the other end of the same argument.

A packaged job or work that never closes

The underlying difference is not features but the shape of the work. A productised engagement has a beginning and an end: the client picks a package, fills in a form, pays, a project opens, it gets delivered and it closes. Social work has no such shape. It is a monthly retainer, a calendar that refills every week, thirty pieces a month to plan, review, approve and publish, and an inbox that never stops filling.

That shape explains why the two tools model different objects. Wayfront models the order. Here what gets modelled is the piece: which network it goes to, which post type, which character limit, how many files, who reviewed it and who said yes. Fourteen networks are connectable and each one has different rules, so the model has to know them.

There is a less obvious consequence, and it is the inbox. When you deliver a closed package, the conversation with the client happens inside the project. When you run a brand's feeds, the conversation happens outside: in the comments on a post, in the direct messages of the account and in the Google Business reviews, which arrive as their own kind of item rather than as a message. All of it lands in one thread with a clock on top: a message is marked overdue at 24 hours, which is the window the platform itself imposes for replying outside a template. It is worth knowing the edge too, because outbound attachments work on four networks and everywhere else the reply goes out as text.

In between sits the part that genuinely overlaps: tasks, files and invoices exist on both sides. When an agency runs both tools, that overlap is the only serious problem, and it is solved by deciding on day one which of the two is the source of truth for each thing.

Seats, clients, and who pays to watch

Wayfront counts team seats and gives away the client list: unlimited clients on every plan. It is a clean model for an agency with many small clients and few operators, and it turns expensive in the opposite case, when the team grows faster than the revenue.

Here the price belongs to the workspace rather than the seat, with the limits applied to the whole of it, including VAT, the value added tax charged in Spain, with no lock in and no per post charge. The current figures live on the pricing page, which reads the live catalogue. Client portal users are client accounts and not team places, so the person on the client side who logs in only to approve never shows up on your bill.

The comparison also depends on who is counted at all. On a seat based ladder, the account manager who only reads, the designer who drops in twice a month and the founder who checks numbers on a Friday all cost the same as the person who lives in the tool. That is fine while the team is small and it becomes the main line of the invoice around the eighth or ninth hire, which is usually the moment an agency starts looking for alternatives.

A note on the AI part, because it is the easiest place to overclaim. Wayfront includes an assistant wired to Claude and ChatGPT plus a command line interface, and that is unusual in its category. What GoFeed has is a door: your own assistant connects to the workspace with your permissions and works on your data. It does not write content for you and does not pretend to, and that distinction is worth holding before you compare two boxes with the same label.

Invoicing here, with series, VAT and IRPF

Their page describes multi currency support and invoice generation in generic terms, and mentions nothing specific to Spanish tax. For an agency invoicing from Madrid or Valencia, that line is the one that decides.

GoFeed's commercial documents are an agency workspace feature and they are written for this country: briefs, quotes with a share link and view tracking, contracts with line items, and invoices with your own numbering series, eight VAT regimes and IRPF withholding, the income tax retained on Spanish invoices. Underneath there is a hash chain over every issued invoice, computed on a frozen field order with each document linked to the previous one, which is the part of Royal Decree 1007/2023 that is already done. What ships and what does not is spelled out on the quotes and invoices page.

What a seat costs against what the workspace costs

The agency comparing these two usually wants the same thing: a dashboard its client logs into. That is the tier to read the price on, rather than the cheapest one on the page.

The two columns do not measure the same thing, and both are billed monthly, which is the only honest way to set them side by side: Wayfront also prints a lower figure if you pay the year up front. The left one is in dollars and grows with the team, because the seat is its unit, and extra seats and the API add on stack on top of it. The right one is the whole workspace, in euros and including VAT, with no charge per seat and none per post, and client portal accounts are not team places, so the person who logs in purely to approve never lands on your bill.

What fits in neither column is the half of the business each one covers. On Wayfront's side, the catalogue with an order form and payment attached, multi currency, and no commission of its own on what you invoice. On ours, the fourteen networks, approval on every piece that needs it, and invoices written for this country's tax rules.

What Wayfront does better

Four things, and none of them cosmetic.

The first is selling. A service catalogue with published prices, an order form and payment in the same movement is a complete product, and doing it well involves far more detail than it looks from outside. If your business is "six posts a month, this much, buy now", Wayfront walks that path better than any content tool, ours included.

The second is payment without a toll. It takes no commission of its own on transactions and the money arrives straight through Stripe. On a platform carrying an agency's entire billing, one percentage point is a salary.

The third is multi currency. If you charge in euros, pounds and dollars depending on the client, it handles that out of the box, and that is a real problem plenty of tools never touch.

The fourth is the portal template editor on the Pro plan, with client coworkers and notifications pushed into the team chat. That is the kind of detail you only build after years of watching clients walk into a dashboard.

Add a 14 day trial with no card and an entry plan that already carries five seats and a terabyte, and you get a tool you can genuinely evaluate before committing your operation to it. There is no permanent free plan, and their page says so plainly, which is more than several competitors in the same bracket manage.

If you sell closed packages and also run those clients' feeds, running both is reasonable and fairly common. If there is only one decision to make, look at it through the work that fills your weeks rather than the number of checkboxes. And if the portal itself was the point, the closest comparison is GoFeed against Assembly, where the portal is the entire product.