Compare
Calfeed vs Teamup
Teamup wins when many people co-edit one operational calendar with fine-grained permissions over who can read, add, or modify. Calfeed wins when one person publishes a schedule and a passive audience just subscribes. Different jobs.
Updated
| Feature | Calfeed | Teamup |
|---|---|---|
| Mental model | One publishes, many subscribe | Many co-edit a shared calendar |
| Input | Paste text, link, CSV, or image; Calfeed builds the events | Enter events in the app; import feeds |
| Who edits | One publisher | Many, via granular permission levels |
| Subscriber needs account | No, add the link to any calendar | No to view, via a link or read-only feed |
| Branding | Branded viewer page per calendar | Sub-calendar colors and logo |
| Feed stability | Stable link, edits propagate in place | Read-only feed, stable link |
| Price | First calendar free, then credits or Pro $19/mo | Free for 5 sub-calendars; paid roughly $12-125/mo |
| Best for | Publishing a schedule to an audience | A team co-editing with access control |
When Calfeed wins
- One person owns the schedule; the audience only needs to view
- You'd rather paste a schedule than enter every event by hand
- You want one branded public link and viewer page
- The audience should never be able to edit the feed
When Teamup wins
- Many people need to add and edit events
- You need per-person read vs modify control
- You schedule rooms or resources across sub-calendars
- You aggregate other feeds into one shared calendar