Usporedba
Felagarversus Productive
Productive leans financial PSA. Felagar leans delivery, portal, and a Vault-grounded assistant.
At a glance
If you outgrew generic PM but do not want a finance-first PSA as the client experience, compare the surfaces your clients actually touch.
| Capability | Felagar | Productive |
|---|---|---|
| Client portal | Branded portal, cobranding, guest review links | Client features exist; the product is known first for PSA and resourcing. |
| AI | Rad, grounded in Client Vault and pulse (confirm before you send) | Varies by plan and positioning; not a Client Vault model. |
| Pricing model | Hosted plans plus a one-time self-host license | Typically seat and PSA packaging. Check their current site. |
| Self-host | Yes, open-core with a license for full white-label | SaaS-first. |
| White-label | Portal, auth, emails, custom domains on hosted SaaS | Available in their model; confirm current white-label depth. |
When Felagar fits better
Choose Felagar when the portal, guest reviews, white-label, and client chat matter as much as internal utilization.
When they may fit
Choose Productive if you need deep PSA finance, utilization accounting, and that is the core of how you run the firm.
Questions
Is Felagar a Productive alternative?
For agencies that want delivery plus a branded client experience, yes. If your buying committee is finance-first PSA, Productive may still be the better fit.
Mi vodimo platformu. Ti studio.
Otvori račun, pozovi tim i klijente, i uživo si. Bez DevOps digresije. Ažuriranja, uptime i portal ostaju na nama da ti ostaneš na poslu koji plaća.