Softwr

No-Code · head to head

Noloco vs Whalesync

Noloco logo

Noloco

No-Code

Client portals and internal tools built over data you already have

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Whalesync logo

Whalesync

No-Code

Two-way real-time sync between no-code databases and SaaS tools

From
$40/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Noloco pricing follows user counts, and a client portal is by definition many low-activity users, so an agency with a few hundred client logins climbs the bands quickly for people who sign in twice a month.; Whalesync pricing counts records held in sync rather than changes made, so a large but rarely edited catalogue costs the same as a highly active one and the economics punish exactly the datasets that need the least work.
  • They diverge on capability: Noloco covers Row-level permissions, Whalesync covers Two-way sync.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Noloco and Whalesync actually diverge.

Attributes where Noloco and Whalesync differ
AttributeNolocoWhalesync
Starting priceOn request$40/month
Pricing modelquotePer month by records in sync

Identical on both: free tier (No), platforms (Web), user rating (Not yet rated), category (No-Code).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Noloco

  • Row-level permissions
  • Multiple data sources
  • Client portals
  • Workflows
  • Forms and record detail pages
  • White labelling

Only in Whalesync

  • Two-way sync
  • Live updates
  • Field mapping
  • Unlimited mappings
  • Backfill
  • Monitoring
  • Database connectors
  • Relational field support

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Noloco

  • Giving clients a branded portal onto their own records in an Airtable basenot Whalesync
  • Replacing shared spreadsheets with a permissioned internal tool for an operations teamnot Whalesync
  • A lightweight CRM over a PostgreSQL database that already existsnot Whalesync
  • Partner or contractor dashboards where each party must see only its own jobs and documentsnot Whalesync

Whalesync

  • A team that plans work in Notion but reports from Airtable and needs one edit to appear in both without anyone copying it acrossnot Noloco
  • A marketing site built in Webflow whose content is authored and managed in Airtable, kept in step continuously rather than republished on a schedulenot Noloco
  • A startup keeping a Postgres application database and an internal Airtable operations view aligned without building a sync servicenot Noloco
  • An agency keeping a client CRM and a project tracker consistent so account managers and delivery staff work from the same recordsnot Noloco

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Noloco

  • Pricing follows user counts, and a client portal is by definition many low-activity users, so an agency with a few hundred client logins climbs the bands quickly for people who sign in twice a month.
  • Limits are inherited from the data source. Airtable record ceilings, API rate limits and slow queries appear in the portal your customers use, and no setting inside Noloco can fix them.
  • Design control is deliberately narrow. You get a consistent application shell rather than a bespoke interface, which is fine for operations and a problem for anything marketing-led.
  • It is a small vendor competing directly with Airtable Interfaces and Softr, both far larger, so roadmap pace and long-term viability are legitimate procurement questions.
  • Output is responsive web only, with no native mobile application and no offline mode, so field staff on poor connections are not served by it.

Whalesync

  • Pricing counts records held in sync rather than changes made, so a large but rarely edited catalogue costs the same as a highly active one and the economics punish exactly the datasets that need the least work.
  • The gap between the 1,000 record starter tier and the million record higher tiers is very wide with no published intermediate price, so a business at ten thousand records cannot tell what it will pay without contacting the vendor.
  • Bidirectional sync has conflict semantics, and when two people edit the same field in two tools within a sync interval one edit is lost, which is silent and only discovered when someone notices their change reverted.
  • It is a small company holding a live connection in the middle of operational data, so continuity risk is real and any team relying on it should keep an export routine and know how it would rebuild the mapping.
  • It syncs records between tools but does not transform or model data, so anything requiring aggregation, deduplication or business logic between the two ends still needs a separate tool or a warehouse.

Pricing, plan by plan

Noloco

On request
  • Noloco$undefined/year
    • Tiered plans differentiated by user counts, data sources and white labelling
    • Trial period rather than a permanent free plan
    • Higher tiers add custom domains, advanced permissions and priority support

Whalesync

$40/month
  • Starter$40/month
    • 1,000 records in sync
    • Live two-way sync
    • Unlimited mappings and row changes
  • Plus$undefined/month
    • Up to 1,000,000 records in sync
    • Live two-way sync
    • Unlimited mappings and row changes
  • Pro$undefined/month
    • Up to 1,000,000 records in sync
    • Priority support
    • Advanced field handling

Which should you pick?

Choose Noloco if

  • You need row-level permissions.
  • You also want multiple data sources.
Noloco review

Choose Whalesync if

  • You need two-way sync.
  • You also want live updates.
Whalesync review

Questions people ask

Is Noloco or Whalesync better?
Neither clearly leads. Noloco starts at On request and Whalesync at $40/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Noloco or Whalesync?
Noloco starts at On request and Whalesync at $40/month.
Does Noloco or Whalesync run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
What is Noloco best used for?
Noloco is most often used for giving clients a branded portal onto their own records in an airtable base, replacing shared spreadsheets with a permissioned internal tool for an operations team, a lightweight crm over a postgresql database that already exists, partner or contractor dashboards where each party must see only its own jobs and documents. Of those, giving clients a branded portal onto their own records in an airtable base and replacing shared spreadsheets with a permissioned internal tool for an operations team are not what Whalesync is typically brought in for.
What can Noloco do that Whalesync cannot?
Noloco covers Row-level permissions, Multiple data sources, Client portals, Workflows. Whalesync covers Two-way sync, Live updates, Field mapping, Unlimited mappings.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Noloco: Do I need Airtable to use it?

No. Airtable is the most common source but PostgreSQL, MySQL, Google Sheets, HubSpot and built-in Noloco tables all work.

Whalesync: How is this different from Zapier?

Zapier triggers one-way actions. Whalesync maintains a persistent mapping between two copies of a record so edits flow both ways without loops or duplicates, which two zaps cannot achieve reliably.

Noloco: Can external clients log in without paying for seats?

Client and internal users are counted differently, but they are still counted, so a portal with many client logins moves you up the plan bands. Check the current band definitions before committing to a per-client model.

Whalesync: What counts as a record in sync?

A record becomes counted the first time it syncs, and records are not double counted across the two applications, so a thousand paired rows count once rather than twice.

Noloco: How is this different from Softr?

Both build portals over existing data. Noloco leans harder on permissions and multiple database sources; Softr leans on templates, speed to a first version and a bigger ecosystem.

Whalesync: Is there a free plan?

No, only a seven day trial. Paid plans start around 40 US dollars a month for a thousand records.

Whalesync: What happens on a sync conflict?

One side wins and the other edit is discarded. Teams that expect simultaneous editing of the same fields in two tools should establish an owning system per field rather than relying on the sync to arbitrate.

Share

Related pages

More on Noloco

More on Whalesync

Keep looking

Other head to heads