Softwr

Translation · head to head

MateCat vs POEditor

MateCat logo

MateCat

Translation

Free, browser-based CAT tool under the LGPL, developed and hosted by the translation company Translated

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
POEditor logo

POEditor

Translation

Localisation management billed by string count with unlimited contributors

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: MateCat the hosted version most users rely on depends on Translated srl’s continued operation and infrastructure decisions, unlike a self-run desktop tool.; POEditor the quota counts every string on the account, including obsolete terms from retired features, so cost creeps upward unless someone deliberately prunes projects.
  • They diverge on capability: MateCat covers Browser-based CAT interface, POEditor covers String based billing.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which MateCat and POEditor actually diverge.

Attributes where MateCat and POEditor differ
AttributeMateCatPOEditor
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feePer month by string count

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), platforms (Web), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Translation).

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 MateCat

  • Browser-based CAT interface
  • Machine translation suggestions
  • Quality assurance checks
  • Project management
  • File translation

Only in POEditor

  • String based billing
  • Format coverage
  • API and webhooks
  • Machine translation
  • Contributor roles

Both cover

  • Translation memory

What people use each for

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

MateCat

  • A freelance translator wanting a no-install, browser-based CAT tool with built-in machine translation suggestionsnot POEditor
  • A small agency wanting basic hosted project management without paying for a commercial TMSnot POEditor
  • A translator who wants MT suggestions from multiple engines surfaced alongside translation memory matches in one interfacenot POEditor
  • A team occasionally needing quick file translation through a browser without setting up desktop softwarenot POEditor

POEditor

  • Software with many target languages and a volunteer or community translator poolnot MateCat
  • Development teams that want new strings pushed from continuous integration and translations pulled back automaticallynot MateCat
  • Small companies that cannot justify per seat pricing for translators who work occasionallynot MateCat
  • Open source projects that qualify for the free plan and need real workflow rather than a spreadsheetnot MateCat

Where each one falls short

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

MateCat

  • The hosted version most users rely on depends on Translated srl’s continued operation and infrastructure decisions, unlike a self-run desktop tool.
  • It is developed by a commercial translation company whose own paid services sit alongside the free tool, which is worth being aware of when evaluating vendor neutrality.
  • Being browser-based, it requires a stable internet connection, unlike OmegaT’s fully offline desktop application.
  • Advanced terminology management and enterprise-scale project features are more limited than a paid commercial TMS such as memoQ or Smartling.
  • Self-hosting the open source LGPL code independently of Translated’s hosted service requires technical setup effort that most individual translators are unlikely to undertake.

POEditor

  • The quota counts every string on the account, including obsolete terms from retired features, so cost creeps upward unless someone deliberately prunes projects.
  • Several projects share one account quota, so a team can be pushed into a higher tier by work in an unrelated repository.
  • There is no in-context or visual editor, so translators guess at where a string appears and length or gender errors surface only after a build.
  • Quality assurance checks are basic compared with the larger platforms, with no configurable rule sets or enforced terminology gates.
  • The company is small, support is email based, and there is no self-hosted or on-premises option, which rules it out where data residency is contractually fixed.

Pricing, plan by plan

MateCat

Free
  • MateCatFree
    • Free browser-based CAT tool, LGPL licensed
    • Hosted and operated by Translated srl

POEditor

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Around 1000 strings
    • Unlimited contributors and languages
    • Open source projects can apply for a free plan
  • Start$14.99/month
    • Higher string quota
    • API access
    • Translation memory
  • Plus$29.99/month
    • Larger string quota
    • Repository integrations
    • Webhooks
  • Premium$59.99/month
    • Large string quota across all projects
    • Priority support

Which should you pick?

Choose MateCat if

  • You need browser-based cat interface.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want machine translation suggestions.
MateCat review

Choose POEditor if

  • You need string based billing.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want format coverage.
POEditor review

Questions people ask

Is MateCat or POEditor better?
Neither clearly leads. MateCat starts at Free and POEditor at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, MateCat or POEditor?
MateCat starts at Free and POEditor at Free.
Does MateCat or POEditor run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
Can I use MateCat for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is MateCat best used for?
MateCat is most often used for a freelance translator wanting a no-install, browser-based cat tool with built-in machine translation suggestions, a small agency wanting basic hosted project management without paying for a commercial tms, a translator who wants mt suggestions from multiple engines surfaced alongside translation memory matches in one interface, a team occasionally needing quick file translation through a browser without setting up desktop software. Of those, a freelance translator wanting a no-install, browser-based cat tool with built-in machine translation suggestions and a small agency wanting basic hosted project management without paying for a commercial tms are not what POEditor is typically brought in for.
What can MateCat do that POEditor cannot?
MateCat covers Browser-based CAT interface, Machine translation suggestions, Quality assurance checks, Project management. POEditor covers String based billing, Format coverage, API and webhooks, Machine translation. Both handle Translation memory.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

MateCat: Is MateCat really free?

Yes, it is free to use as a hosted browser-based tool and released as open source under the LGPL.

POEditor: Does it charge per translator?

No. Contributors and languages are unlimited on every plan. Only the total string count is billed.

MateCat: Who maintains MateCat?

Translated srl, an Italian translation company, develops and hosts it; this differs from OmegaT, which is maintained by a volunteer open source community.

POEditor: Is there a free plan for open source?

Yes, open source projects can apply for a free plan, which is why many community translated applications use it.

MateCat: Can I self-host MateCat instead of using Translated’s hosted version?

The code is open source under the LGPL and technically self-hostable, but doing so requires meaningful technical setup most individual users skip in favour of the hosted service.

POEditor: Does it support in-context translation?

No. Translators work from the string list and any comments or screenshots you attach, not from a live preview.

Share

Related pages

More on MateCat

More on POEditor

Keep looking

Other head to heads