European Alternatives to Coda
Looking for a European alternative to Coda? Coda is now part of Superhuman, and its terms are a contract with Superhuman Platform Inc. in San Francisco, governed by California law, with binding individual arbitration for users outside the EEA.
Eleven European tools cover different parts of what Coda does: spreadsheet-style databases with scripts and automations, connected workspaces with docs, wikis, and end-to-end encrypted office suites, from companies in Germany, Cyprus, Switzerland, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom.
How we rank these tools — 4-step process
-
1
European ownership, verified
The company is headquartered and incorporated in the EU, EEA or Switzerland, and processes customer data in Europe. A US parent company disqualifies a tool from this page regardless of where its servers are.
-
2
Category fit and hands-on review
What the tool actually does, who it suits, and where it falls short — checked against the vendor’s own documentation, changelog and pricing page rather than its marketing copy.
-
3
Compliance and pricing check
GDPR posture, hosting location and the prices quoted on this page are verified against the vendor’s public pricing before publication, and re-checked when we revisit the category.
-
4
Position on this page
Placement on this page can be paid, and that can affect which tools appear here and the order they appear in. It never buys a good review: a tool that fails the checks above is not here at any price, and payment does not change the shortcomings we write about. A vendor can ask us to correct a factual error — not to remove a criticism.
Vendors can pay for visibility on this page. It never changes what an entry says about a product, including the criticism, and we earn nothing when you click through to a vendor. Paid placement can affect which tools appear here and the order they appear in. Editorial policy
11 European Alternatives to Coda
SeaTable
Mainz spreadsheet-database with automations and Python scripts, a free plan for up to 25 users, hosted in Frankfurt
Fibery
Connected workspace with docs, databases and automations; Cyprus law and a free plan for small teams
Anytype
Local-first, end-to-end encrypted workspace of typed objects, from a Swiss association
Baserow
Open-source Amsterdam database with an application builder, automations and dashboards, and a free plan
Ninox
Berlin database app platform with its own scripting language and a free plan for up to 5 users
Capacities
German note app where every page is a typed object with its own properties, with a free plan
Nuclino
Munich team wiki and docs workspace with a free plan of up to 50 items
XWiki
Paris open-source wiki with structured data and an application layer
Zenkit
German collections, notes and project suite with a free start and servers in Germany
CryptPad
End-to-end encrypted documents, sheets and forms from XWiki SAS in Paris, with a free account
Budibase
Belfast open-source low-code platform for internal apps and automations, self-hostable
Key takeaways
- Coda is run under the terms of Superhuman Platform Inc., San Francisco, governed by California law, with individual arbitration for users outside the EEA and none for EEA users.
- SeaTable (Mainz) is the nearest match for tables with scripts and automations, with a free plan for up to 25 users and hosting in Frankfurt, though its software is developed by Seafile Ltd. in Beijing.
- Fibery is the nearest to Coda's mix of docs, databases and automations, under Cyprus law, but its privacy policy also names a Fibery, Inc. whose location we could not confirm.
- Anytype, from a Swiss association, is a local-first and end-to-end encrypted workspace, and we found no scripting or automation layer like Coda's.
- Baserow, Ninox and Budibase are for turning a database into an app, and Nuclino, XWiki and Zenkit are for knowledge and project work.
- None of the eleven imports Coda formulas or Packs, so expect to rebuild the logic.
Why people leave Coda
Coda is a workspace where a document and a database are the same thing. You write a page, drop in tables that behave like a real database, add buttons and automations, and connect other tools with Packs. Its site now also carries the name Superhuman Docs, with an AI assistant (Coda AI) and a Pack Studio for building your own integrations. Teams use it for wikis, project trackers, CRMs and small internal apps.
It is run by Superhuman. The terms on superhuman.com, in force since 29 October 2025, are an agreement between you and Superhuman Platform Inc. in San Francisco, which they describe as the parent company of Coda Project LLC.
California law applies, and claims that are not arbitrated go to the courts of San Francisco County. For users outside the EEA, section 12 sends disputes to binding individual arbitration with a class-action and jury waiver, unless you opt out within 30 days. For users in the EEA that arbitration clause does not apply, and mandatory consumer rights of your own country remain.
Coda is hard to replace with one product, because it mixes documents, tables, automations and apps. Eleven European tools are listed here, and each covers a different slice: spreadsheet-style databases with scripts, connected workspaces with docs, wikis, encrypted office suites and app builders. Their contracting entities are in Germany, Cyprus, Switzerland, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom.
- The contract is with a San Francisco company under California law Superhuman Platform Inc. gives its address as 2261 Market Street in San Francisco and says Superhuman is based in California. Court claims go to San Francisco County and California law governs. For EEA users the arbitration clause does not apply, so the practical gap is smaller than it is elsewhere. If you want a counterparty and a court in Europe, none of the eleven tools here involve California.
- Enterprise terms are a separate contract The public terms say they do not apply to Superhuman's enterprise-tier products, which are bought through its sales team under their own terms. That means a team on a business plan may sit under different paper than the one anyone can read online. We did not review the enterprise terms, so ask for them, and for the subprocessor list on the Coda trust page, before you decide anything about data location.
- The product has changed owners and name Coda now describes itself as Superhuman Docs on its own site, and the legal terms are Superhuman's. A change of owner can bring changes to pricing, terms and data handling that you did not sign up for. Switching to a smaller, independent European vendor does not remove that risk entirely, but the contracting entity and the jurisdiction are easier to see in advance.
- No single European tool does everything Coda does Coda's unusual strength is that a page can hold live tables, formulas, buttons and automations next to prose. In Europe that job is spread out: SeaTable and Baserow are databases first, Fibery and Anytype are workspaces with structured objects, Nuclino and XWiki are knowledge bases, and Ninox and Budibase build internal apps. Pick by what you use Coda for, not by a feature table.
What you have to replace, not just match
List what each Coda doc actually does. A knowledge base with a few embedded tables moves to a wiki or workspace quickly. A doc that runs buttons, formulas and Pack integrations is closer to an app and belongs in a database or app builder such as SeaTable, Baserow, Ninox or Budibase, where you will rebuild the logic rather than copy it. Coda's formulas and Packs do not carry over to any of these.
Export your tables to CSV or your pages to Markdown or HTML where Coda allows it, and test the import on one real doc before you plan the rest. Keep Coda running in read-only mode for a few weeks, because the first month will reveal automations that nobody remembered.
The alternatives compared
| Position | Tool | Headquarters | Pricing | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | SeaTable | Mainz, Germany | eu-eea | |
| #3 | Anytype | Zug, Switzerland | Free with 100 MB of remote storage / Plus $4, Pro $8, Ultra $16 per month, 20% off yearly | Switzerland (Zug) |
| #4 | Baserow | Amsterdam, Netherlands | eu-eea | |
| #5 | Ninox | Berlin, Germany | eu-eea | |
| #6 | Capacities | Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany | Free / Pro $9.99 per month / Believer from $12.49 per month | EU (Germany) |
| #7 | Nuclino | Munich, Germany | Free tier / from about €6 per user per month | EU (Germany) |
| #8 | XWiki | Paris, France | Free self-hosted / XWiki Cloud from about €3 per user per month | EU (France) |
| #9 | Zenkit | Karlsruhe, Germany | Free plan / from about €9/user/month | EU (Germany) |
| #10 | CryptPad | Paris, France | Free (50MB) / from about €5/month (5GB) | EU (France) |
How each alternative compares to Coda
- Which law reaches it. eu-eea. Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
Best for: Teams whose Coda docs are mostly tables, views, formulas and automations
SeaTable is provided by SeaTable GmbH, registered in Mainz (117er Ehrenhof 5, 55118 Mainz, District Court Mainz). The cloud service is hosted at Exoscale in Frankfurt, according to its terms. Its terms also say that the software is developed by Seafile Ltd. in Beijing, China, with parts released as open source, and that SeaTable relies on that developer and other partners for maintenance, under data processing agreements.
The product is a no-code database that looks like a spreadsheet, with images, files, links and selection lists as column types, plus an app builder and AI features. On its prices page there is a Free plan for up to 25 users with 10,000 rows, and paid plans that list 50,000 rows, 250 Python script runs, 10,000 API calls, 500 automations and 50 AI credits per user, from €7 per user per month.
It does not combine long-form documents and tables in the way Coda does. It is the better choice when the tables and automations are the point and the text is secondary.
What SeaTable does better than Coda
- German contracting entity and hosting in Frankfurt, where Coda contracts with a San Francisco company under California law
- Free plan for up to 25 users, with prices published in euros
- Python scripts and automations on paid plans, which is closer to what Coda formulas and buttons do than a plain spreadsheet
- Limits per plan published in plain numbers
Where SeaTable is a step down from Coda
- Weaker for long documents mixed with tables; Coda is a document first
- Software developed by a company in Beijing, which some buyers will want to look into
- Nothing like the Packs catalogue of third-party integrations
- Rows, script runs and API calls are capped per plan
Standout against Coda. A spreadsheet-style database with Python scripts and automations, a free plan for 25 users, hosted in Frankfurt.
Fibery
docs, databases and automations in one workspace, under Cyprus law
Best for: Product and operations teams that want linked databases, documents and automations in one place
Fibery's terms are governed by the laws of Cyprus, and its footer reads Fibery Limited. Disputes are settled by arbitration in Nicosia or Buffalo, New York, with Nicosia as the default.
The terms give no address or registration number, and the privacy policy defines "Fibery" as Fibery, Inc. and relevant affiliates including Fibery Limited, without saying where Fibery, Inc. is located. The Cyprus data protection commissioner is named as supervisory authority. Its about page says a remote team of 30 people works across Europe, with offices in Warsaw and Nicosia.
Its pricing page says "Free for small teams. Made and hosted in Europe". The amounts are loaded in the browser, so no price is quoted here. The product combines databases, documents, automations and integrations, which makes it the nearest to Coda's idea of a workspace where a page and a database are linked.
Be aware that its privacy policy says its AI providers are in the United States, with Standard Contractual Clauses for the transfer.
What Fibery does better than Coda
- Cyprus law, a Cyprus supervisory authority and a team based in Europe, against California law
- Docs, databases, automations and integrations in one workspace, which is the combination people use Coda for
- A free plan for small teams, stated on the pricing page
- Says it is made and hosted in Europe
Where Fibery is a step down from Coda
- The terms name no entity address or registration number, and the privacy policy also names a Fibery, Inc. of unknown location
- AI features rely on providers in the United States
- No Packs-style marketplace that we could find
- Pricing amounts are not visible without the browser, so check them on its site
Standout against Coda. Linked databases and documents with automations, under Cyprus law and a free plan for small teams.
Anytype
a local-first, encrypted workspace of typed objects, from a Swiss association
- Which law reaches it. Switzerland (Zug). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Where the data sits. European Union — the documentation states the backup nodes run on dedicated servers in EU data centres.
- Source code. Closed source, as Coda is.
- Independently checked. No certification published; end-to-end encrypted with the key generated on the device.
Best for: Individuals and small teams who care more about who can read their notes than about automations
Anytype is made by Any, which its own site calls a Swiss association. Its FAQ says the team keeps a hub in Berlin, employed by a local GmbH that is a subsidiary of the Swiss association. A search result from a Swiss business directory lists the association at Gubelstrasse 11, 6300 Zug, but we could not open Anytype's terms or the register itself, so the contracting entity and governing law are not confirmed here.
Data is stored on your device first and encrypted before it syncs, according to its FAQ. You can self-host a backup node or use a local-only mode, and its protocols are open source. There is a free plan, and the paid plans are priced by storage, shown in US dollars, so no amount is quoted here.
It organises information as typed objects with properties and relations, which covers some of what Coda tables do. We found no formula, button or automation layer comparable to Coda's.
What Anytype does better than Coda
- Encryption and local storage by design, where Coda stores your docs with the provider
- Swiss association rather than a US company, and a European team
- Free plan, and self-hosting for those who want it
- Works offline by design
Where Anytype is a step down from Coda
- No formulas, buttons or automations of the kind Coda offers that we could find
- Terms and register entry could not be checked here
- Aimed at individuals and small groups; we found no Coda-style team features such as Packs
- Prices are in US dollars and storage-based, so compare against your file volume
Standout against Coda. It keeps data on your device and encrypted before sync, which Coda does not offer.
- Which law reaches it. eu-eea. Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
Best for: Teams that want a database they can turn into forms, apps and dashboards, or host themselves
Baserow is provided by Baserow B.V., Keurenplein 4, Amsterdam (Chamber of Commerce number 81129254). Dutch law governs and disputes go to the courts of Amsterdam, according to its terms. The software is open source and can be self-hosted.
Its home page lists an application builder, automations, dashboards and AI. The pricing page lists a free plan with 3,000 rows per workspace, with higher row limits on paid plans. The paid plans were shown in US dollars when we looked, so no amount is quoted here.
Baserow covers the table side of Coda and the app side, not the long-form document. Coda's formulas, buttons and Packs have no one-to-one match.
What Baserow does better than Coda
- Dutch company under Dutch law, with a local court
- Open source, so you can self-host and inspect it
- Application builder, automations and dashboards on top of a database
- A free plan with the row limit stated on the pricing page
Where Baserow is a step down from Coda
- Not built for long-form documents; Coda is better for writing
- Free plan is limited to 3,000 rows per workspace
- Fewer ready-made integrations than Coda Packs
- Paid prices on the page are shown in dollars
Standout against Coda. An open-source database with an application builder that you can run yourself.
- Which law reaches it. eu-eea. Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
Best for: Small businesses that run a process on a database, with forms, reports and logic
Ninox is provided by Ninox Software GmbH, Monbijoustrasse 5, 10117 Berlin (HRB 154662 B). German law governs, according to its terms. Its pricing page lists a Free plan for up to 5 users with 1,000 API calls and 100 generated documents per month, and limited AI prompts. Paid prices switch between euro and dollar on the page, so no amount is quoted here.
It is a platform for building database applications with its own scripting language, forms and generated documents. It suits a company that uses Coda as a lightweight business application, such as a customer list with quotes and invoices.
It is less suited to free-form documents and wikis, where Coda is stronger.
What Ninox does better than Coda
- German company under German law, against California law
- Free plan for up to 5 users
- A scripting language and generated documents for business processes
- Pricing page states usage limits in numbers
Where Ninox is a step down from Coda
- Free plan is limited to 5 users and 1,000 API calls a month
- Not a writing tool; documents and wikis are not its strength
- Its scripting language is proprietary, so skills do not carry over
- Fewer integrations than Coda Packs
Standout against Coda. A scripting language and generated documents for database apps, with a free plan for five users.
Capacities
a German note app where every page is a typed object
- Which law reaches it. EU (Germany). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Source code. Closed source, as Coda is.
Best for: Individuals who want connected notes with types and properties, not shared team tables
Capacities is provided by Capacities Labs GmbH in Germany. Its imprint gives Amtsgericht Freiburg, HRB 735669, and its German terms give a different address and register entry (St. Wendel, Amtsgericht Saarbruecken, HRB 108844), so check which one applies to your contract. Payment for subscriptions bought on the website is handled by Paddle.com Market Ltd. in London.
Its home page describes everything as an object with a type, such as a person, a book or a project, linked together, with daily notes, AI and scripts. There is a free plan ("Start Free"). We did not find where it hosts notes, so we do not state a data location.
It is a personal knowledge tool first. It does not offer Coda-style shared tables, buttons or Packs.
What Capacities does better than Coda
- German GmbH with a German-language contract
- Typed objects with properties give structure without a spreadsheet
- A free plan
- Full-text notes and typed pages without needing a spreadsheet
Where Capacities is a step down from Coda
- Built for individuals more than for team workspaces
- No hosting location stated that we could find
- No Packs-style integrations or shared automation layer
- Two different registry entries appear in its own legal pages
Standout against Coda. Every note is an object with a type and properties, with a free plan.
- Which law reaches it. EU (Germany). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Where the data sits. EU.
- Source code. Closed source, as Coda is.
- Independently checked. GDPR.
Best for: Teams that mostly use Coda as a wiki or a shared documentation space
Nuclino is provided by Nuclino GmbH, Noerdliche Muenchner Str. 47, 82031 Gruenwald, Germany, registered at Amtsgericht Muenchen (HRB 227745). Its terms are written in German-law terms (liability clauses refer to German legal concepts), with a venue clause for customers who have no place of jurisdiction in the EU.
The pricing page lists a Free plan with up to 50 items, and paid plans with unlimited items and 10 GB to 20 GB of storage per user, with a 14-day trial. The prices are loaded in the browser, so no amount is quoted here.
It is a wiki. It has no tables with formulas, no buttons and no automations of the kind Coda has.
What Nuclino does better than Coda
- German company under German law, against a San Francisco contract
- Free plan, and a 14-day trial for paid plans
- A simple wiki and document structure that is quick to learn
- Entity details in a legal notice with a court and register number
Where Nuclino is a step down from Coda
- No database tables, formulas or automations
- Free plan is capped at 50 items
- No app-building features
- Smaller integration list than Coda
Standout against Coda. A plain team wiki with a free plan and a registered German entity.
- Which law reaches it. EU (France). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Where the data sits. Your own infrastructure, or XWiki Cloud EU.
- Source code. Open source, where Coda is not: you can read what it does rather than take the description on trust.
- Independently checked. GDPR.
Best for: Organisations that want a self-hostable knowledge base with some application building
XWiki is run by XWiki SAS, 4 Rue du Faubourg Poissonniere, 75010 Paris, registered in the Paris trade register under number 477 865 281. Its site offers a Standard edition and Business Apps and Connectors, and the software can be run on your own servers.
It is a wiki that can hold structured data and applications, so a Coda doc with tables and a few forms has a place to go. It requires more setup than a cloud workspace.
It is not a quick replacement for Coda's buttons, formulas and Packs.
What XWiki does better than Coda
- French company with a registered Paris entity and a long open-source record
- Self-hostable, so data location is yours to choose
- Structured data and applications inside a wiki
- Same company runs CryptPad, so it has experience with privacy-focused tools
Where XWiki is a step down from Coda
- More setup and administration than a cloud tool
- The interface is closer to a classic wiki than to Coda's doc and table
- No Packs catalogue
- Pricing for the commercial editions is not quoted here
Standout against Coda. A self-hostable open-source wiki that can hold structured data and applications.
- Which law reaches it. EU (Germany). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Where the data sits. Germany (EU).
- Source code. Closed source, as Coda is.
- Independently checked. GDPR.
Best for: Teams that use Coda for project tracking and notes, and want German hosting
Zenkit is a division of Axonic GmbH, registered at Amtsgericht Mannheim (HRB 110424), with Baden-Wuerttemberg as the venue for disputes. Its home page says all data is stored on EU servers in Germany.
The product offers collections (databases with several views), a notes product called Hypernotes, and project tools. Its pricing page offers a free start, with a maximum of 10 users on the entry plan shown. We do not quote amounts.
It is stronger for project work than for building Coda-style apps.
What Zenkit does better than Coda
- German entity under German courts, with servers in Germany by its own statement
- Collections with several views, closer to Coda tables than a wiki is
- A free start
- Notes and projects in one suite
Where Zenkit is a step down from Coda
- Less scripting and automation depth than Coda
- Entry plan is capped at 10 users
- Smaller ecosystem of integrations
- Documents are less flexible than Coda pages
Standout against Coda. Collections and notes with servers in Germany.
- Which law reaches it. EU (France). Coda is run from the United States, so the CLOUD Act obliges the provider to hand over data on a valid order regardless of which country the servers are in.
- Where the data sits. France.
- Source code. Open source, where Coda is not: you can read what it does rather than take the description on trust.
Best for: Teams that need shared documents and spreadsheets the provider cannot read
CryptPad says it is made at XWiki, a company in Paris, and its pricing page lists subscriptions as "By XWiki SAS". We could not open the terms of cryptpad.fr, so the contracting entity is taken from that pricing page. It is fully open source and has been funded by European research grants, according to its about page.
All content is encrypted in your browser before it leaves the device, and the administrators cannot see it. It offers documents, sheets, kanban and forms. There is a free account on a public instance, and paid plans and hosted instances for teams.
It is an office suite, not a database. There are no Coda-style linked tables, buttons or Packs.
What CryptPad does better than Coda
- Zero-knowledge encryption, so the provider cannot read your documents
- French company, open source and self-hostable
- Free account on a public instance
- Documents, sheets and forms in one place
Where CryptPad is a step down from Coda
- No linked tables, formulas or automations
- Features that need server-side access, such as full-text search, are limited by the encryption
- The contracting entity had to be inferred from the pricing page
- Collaboration features are those of an office suite, not of a workspace with apps
Standout against Coda. End-to-end encrypted documents and sheets that even the administrators cannot read.
Budibase
an open-source low-code platform for internal apps, from Belfast
Best for: Teams that used Coda to build small internal tools on top of existing databases
Budibase is provided by Budibase Limited, a company incorporated in Northern Ireland (NI662141, 46 Hill Street, Belfast). Its terms are governed by the laws of Northern Ireland, with exclusive jurisdiction of the courts there. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, which is outside the EU but within Europe, so this is a UK contract, not an EU one.
Its site says it is open source, and you can self-host or use Budibase Cloud. It lists apps and automations, connected to databases, spreadsheets and business systems. The Community edition is free to self-host, and the cloud plans offer a 14-day trial, priced in US dollars on the page we saw, so no amount is quoted here.
It is for building apps, not for writing documents.
What Budibase does better than Coda
- Open source and self-hostable, with a free community edition
- Connects to your own databases and APIs instead of holding data itself
- UK law and courts in Northern Ireland, against California
- Apps and automations in one builder
Where Budibase is a step down from Coda
- A UK contract, not an EU one
- No document editor like Coda's
- Needs some technical skill to set up and connect data sources
- Cloud pricing is shown in dollars and charges separately for creators and end users
Standout against Coda. An open-source builder for internal apps that connects to your existing data and can be self-hosted.
What actually breaks when you switch
The hard part of leaving Coda is the logic, not the data. Tables export to CSV and text to Markdown or HTML, but formulas, buttons, automations and Packs do not. Write down what each doc does before you start and treat the move as a rebuild of those parts.
No single European tool matches Coda's mix of documents, tables and apps. Expect to use two tools, such as a wiki or workspace for text and a database for tables, or to accept that a long document with a small table is better in Fibery and a table-heavy doc is better in SeaTable.
Check the exact entity and the free-plan limits for the tool you pick. Fibery's terms name no address and its privacy policy names a Fibery, Inc.; Anytype's and CryptPad's terms could not be opened here; Capacities' legal pages disagree on its register entry; SeaTable's software is developed in Beijing. Ask the vendor before you sign.
Which European tool is closest to Coda?
It depends on which half of Coda you use. For tables, formulas and automations, SeaTable is the nearest: a spreadsheet-style database with Python scripts and automations on paid plans and a free plan for up to 25 users. For documents with embedded structured data, Fibery is closer, since it combines docs, databases and automations in one workspace.
Baserow and Ninox suit teams that treat their Coda doc as an app, since both add forms, apps and their own logic on top of a database. Neither reads Coda formulas, so the logic has to be rebuilt.
Is there a European alternative to Coda Packs?
Not as one marketplace. The Packs idea, a catalogue of integrations that you add to a doc, has no direct equivalent here. SeaTable runs Python scripts and automations, Baserow has automations and an API, Ninox has its own scripting language, Budibase connects to databases and APIs, and Fibery lists integrations and automations.
Check the connectors you rely on by name before you commit. This is the area where Coda is clearly stronger than the tools on this page.
Which of these have a free plan?
SeaTable (up to 25 users, 10,000 rows), Baserow (3,000 rows per workspace), Ninox (up to 5 users), Nuclino (up to 50 items), Capacities and Anytype each describe a free plan on their own sites, and Fibery and Zenkit describe free starts for small teams. CryptPad has a free account on a public instance, and Budibase has a free self-hosted community edition. XWiki is open-source software you can run yourself.
Limits differ a lot. Row caps, user caps and item caps decide whether a free plan is usable for a real team, so read them before importing anything.
Does it matter that Coda is now part of Superhuman?
The terms you accept are Superhuman's, and the product is branded Superhuman Docs on Coda's own site. The contracting company is in San Francisco, California law applies and, outside the EEA, disputes go to individual arbitration. Within the EEA, the arbitration clause does not apply.
For many teams that is acceptable. It matters more if you need a European counterparty for procurement reasons, or if you want to avoid changes decided by a larger owner.
Which of these keeps the provider from reading my documents?
Anytype and CryptPad. Anytype says data is stored locally first and encrypted before it syncs, with keys generated on your device. CryptPad says everything is encrypted in your browser, and that even administrators cannot see the content. Both trade features for that: neither offers Coda-style formulas or Packs, and full-text search and server-side automation are limited by design.
Which one to pick
If your Coda docs are mostly tables, views and automations, start with SeaTable: it has a free plan for up to 25 users, Python scripts and automations, and a German entity with hosting in Frankfurt. If you use Coda as a workspace that mixes documents, linked databases and automations, Fibery is the nearest, with Cyprus law and a free plan for small teams, though you should ask who your contracting entity is.
Pick Anytype or CryptPad if the main reason to leave is that you do not want the provider to read your content. Pick Baserow, Ninox or Budibase if your Coda doc has become an internal app. Pick Nuclino or XWiki if it is a wiki, and Zenkit if it is projects and notes with German servers.
Be realistic about the gap. Coda's formulas, buttons and Packs have no direct equivalent in the eleven, and its pricing and EU data location are not clear from the pages we could open. Switch if you want a European counterparty and a court close to home, and stay if your team depends on Packs that nobody here replaces.
Frequently Asked Questions
There is no single best one. SeaTable is the closest match for tables with scripts and automations, and has a free plan. Fibery is the closest for a workspace that mixes docs, databases and automations. Baserow, Ninox and Budibase fit better if the Coda doc is really an internal app. Nuclino and XWiki fit if it is mostly a knowledge base.
The terms at superhuman.com/legal/terms are an agreement with Superhuman Platform Inc. in San Francisco, which they describe as the parent company of Coda Project LLC and Superhuman Labs LLC. Coda's own site now carries the name Superhuman Docs.
California law, with claims that are not arbitrated going to the state or federal courts in San Francisco County. Users outside the EEA are sent to binding individual arbitration with a class-action and jury waiver, with a 30-day opt-out. Users in the EEA, or in other countries that do not allow such a clause, are not bound by the arbitration section.
The plans page on superhuman.com depends on country and currency, so no figure is quoted here. Check the price for your country and for the number of people who edit docs, since the paid plans are priced per user.
SeaTable lists a free plan for up to 25 users with 10,000 rows, and paid plans from €7 per user per month, with more rows, script runs, API calls, automations and AI credits per user. Ninox lists a free plan for up to 5 users with 1,000 API calls a month. Baserow lists a free plan with 3,000 rows per workspace; its paid plans are shown in US dollars on the page we saw, so no amount is quoted here.
The contract is with SeaTable GmbH in Mainz, Germany, hosted at Exoscale in Frankfurt. Its terms also say the developer of the software is Seafile Ltd. in Beijing, China, and that the service relies on that developer for maintenance, under data processing agreements. We could not verify how the two companies are linked, so check this against your own requirements.
Fibery's terms are governed by Cyprus law and its footer reads Fibery Limited, and the privacy policy names the Cyprus data protection commissioner as supervisory authority. The same policy defines "Fibery" as Fibery, Inc. and relevant affiliates including Fibery Limited, and does not say where Fibery, Inc. is. The terms do not give an address or registration number. Its AI providers are in the United States. Ask the vendor who your contracting entity is before you sign.
Not as live docs. Tables can usually be exported as CSV and imported into SeaTable, Baserow, Ninox or Fibery, and text can move as Markdown or HTML into wiki-style tools. Formulas, buttons, Packs and automations have to be rebuilt in the new tool.
Baserow, Budibase, XWiki and CryptPad describe themselves as open source and self-hostable, and Anytype lets you run your own sync network. SeaTable says part of its software is released under an open-source license and offers dedicated systems, though we did not check the self-hosted terms. Cloud-only options on this page include Fibery, Ninox, Nuclino and Capacities.
We did not verify language support for each tool. Several publish their interface and help in English, and Capacities, Nuclino, Ninox and SeaTable are German companies that also publish German-language pages. Check the languages you need on the vendor's own site.
Related comparisons
About the author
Explore More European Alternatives
Discover privacy-focused European alternatives to other popular US tech services.