Loom vs Cap (2026)

Overview

Loom and Cap are video communication platforms that let teams record, share, and embed screen‑capture videos. This comparison helps product managers, dev teams, and remote‑work leaders decide whether to stay with Loom’s SaaS offering or move to Cap’s free, self‑hosted solution. The core use case is asynchronous video messaging; teams switch to gain full data ownership and eliminate per‑seat licensing fees.

Key Differences

• Cost: Loom charges $12.50‑$14.99 per user per month on paid plans; Cap is free (self‑hosted) with only server‑hosting expenses.
• Data ownership: Loom stores recordings on its cloud; Cap stores everything on your own infrastructure, giving you complete control.
• Setup complexity: Loom is a zero‑config SaaS; Cap requires provisioning a server, installing dependencies, and configuring SSL.
• Scalability: Loom scales automatically in the cloud; Cap’s scalability depends on your own hardware and load‑balancing setup.
• Feature/Integration: Loom offers native Chrome/Edge extensions and direct Slack integration; Cap provides an open‑source API and Webhook support but no official browser extension.

Pricing Comparison

Pros and Cons

Loom

Pros

• Instant SaaS onboarding; no infrastructure required.
• High‑quality MP4 export with one‑click sharing.
• Robust Chrome/Edge extension for quick capture.
• Integrated analytics (views, re‑watches).
• Strong Slack and Notion integrations.

Cons

• Recurring per‑seat cost scales with team size.
• Recordings are stored on Loom’s servers; no on‑prem control.
• Limited customization of UI/branding.
• Export limited to MP4 and CSV; no bulk API for metadata.

Cap

Pros

• Completely free, self‑hosted; zero per‑user licensing.
• Full data sovereignty; recordings stay on your servers.
• Open‑source; can be customized or extended via API.
• Supports Webhooks for CI/CD pipelines and custom notifications.
• No vendor lock‑in; you can migrate the database anywhere.

Cons

• Requires server provisioning, TLS setup, and ongoing maintenance.
• No official browser extension; capture must be done via desktop client or API.
• Community support only; enterprise SLA not guaranteed.

When to Choose Each

Loom is ideal for fast‑moving startups, marketing teams, or sales organizations that need a plug‑and‑play solution for quick video demos and internal updates. If you value minimal IT overhead, built‑in analytics, and seamless Slack/Notion integration, Loom delivers immediate productivity with predictable monthly costs.

Cap fits engineering‑focused teams, privacy‑conscious enterprises, or any organization that must keep video assets on‑premise for compliance reasons. When you have in‑house DevOps resources and want to eliminate recurring SaaS fees while retaining the ability to tailor the platform, Cap provides a cost‑effective, extensible alternative.

Migration Path

1. Export recordings from Loom – use Loom’s “Download All” feature to obtain MP4 files and a CSV manifest of video metadata.
2. Set up a Cap server – provision a Linux VM, install Docker, and run docker compose up -d from the official Cap repository.
3. Import videos – use Cap’s bulk import CLI (cap import --source /path/to/mp4 --metadata /path/to/manifest.csv).
4. Recreate sharing links – map Loom share URLs to Cap’s generated URLs using a simple spreadsheet lookup.
5. Update integrations – replace Loom webhooks with Cap’s webhook endpoints in Slack, Jira, or internal tools.

Our Take

Cap is production‑ready for organizations that can allocate basic DevOps resources. The platform runs stably on modest cloud VMs, offers a full API, and the open‑source community has contributed security patches and feature updates regularly throughout 2025‑2026. For most mid‑size teams, the core recording, playback, and sharing functionality works out of the box, and the lack of a proprietary SaaS layer eliminates recurring license fees.

A notable technical limitation is the absence of an official browser extension. Users must rely on the desktop client or manually upload screen captures, which adds friction for non‑technical staff accustomed to Loom’s one‑click capture. This gap can be mitigated by building a custom extension using Cap’s open API, but it requires development effort.

Recommendation: Switch to Cap if you need full data control, have a budget for self‑hosting, and can tolerate a modest increase in setup complexity. Stay with Loom if you prioritize instant deployment, need a polished browser extension, or lack internal resources to maintain a self‑hosted service.

Who Should Switch

• Compliance‑heavy teams (≥20 members) that must store video data on‑premise for GDPR or HIPAA reasons.
• Engineering groups (10‑50 engineers) who already run self‑hosted CI/CD pipelines and can absorb the server maintenance.
• Startups on a tight cash runway that can’t justify $13‑$15 per user per month.
• Open‑source advocates who want to customize the UI or add proprietary integrations.
• Large remote‑workforces (≥100 users) where the cumulative SaaS cost exceeds the cost of a single modest server.

FAQ

Does Cap support a Chrome extension like Loom?

No, Cap does not provide an official Chrome or Edge extension. Recording must be done via the desktop client or by uploading MP4 files manually.

Can I migrate existing Loom analytics (view counts, comments) to Cap?

Only basic metadata can be imported via the CSV manifest; detailed view analytics and comments are not transferable at this time.

Is Cap’s self‑hosted version GDPR‑compliant out of the box?

Cap gives you full data control, which is a prerequisite for GDPR compliance, but you must configure appropriate data‑retention policies and secure storage yourself.

What hardware is needed to run Cap for 200 users?

A single 4‑vCPU, 8 GB RAM cloud instance can handle 200 concurrent viewers for standard‑definition video; higher resolution or larger concurrent loads require scaling out.

Does Cap offer enterprise‑level support or SLA guarantees?

No, Cap is community‑maintained. Enterprises can purchase third‑party support contracts from consulting firms, but there is no official vendor SLA.

Found this helpful? Explore all comparisons.

← View All Comparisons