Softwr

Design · head to head

Proto.io vs Womp

Proto.io logo

Proto.io

Design

Hosted high-fidelity prototyping with device preview and no code

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Womp logo

Womp

Design

Browser 3D modelling built on blended implicit surfaces for non-specialists

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Womp has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Proto.io prototypes live in the vendor cloud and offline export is a higher-tier feature, so the ability to archive completed client work is a plan-level decision rather than a given.; Womp everything runs through the browser graphics stack, so an older laptop with integrated graphics hits frame rate and render limits fast and there is no local rendering fallback.
  • They diverge on capability: Proto.io covers Event and condition system, Womp covers Implicit surface modelling.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Proto.io and Womp actually diverge.

Attributes where Proto.io and Womp differ
AttributeProto.ioWomp
Starting priceOn requestFree
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, iOS, AndroidWeb

Identical on both: pricing model (Per user per month), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Design).

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 Proto.io

  • Event and condition system
  • Timeline animation
  • Device preview
  • Component library
  • User testing integration
  • Design import

Only in Womp

  • Implicit surface modelling
  • Browser rendering
  • Material library
  • Scene sharing
  • Export
  • Templates

What people use each for

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

Proto.io

  • Running usability tests where the prototype must respond to real input rather than replay a fixed click pathnot Womp
  • Demonstrating a form-heavy or data-driven flow to stakeholders before any code existsnot Womp
  • Testing a mobile interaction on the physical device it is designed for, with correct gesture behaviournot Womp
  • Validating a concept for a client who needs to feel the product, not watch a video of itnot Womp

Womp

  • Producing 3D product or icon visuals in a design team with no 3D specialistnot Proto.io
  • Making a set of consistent 3D illustrations for a website or campaign in a daynot Proto.io
  • Prototyping a form quickly for discussion before it is remodelled properly in CADnot Proto.io
  • Teaching 3D concepts without installing software on managed machinesnot Proto.io

Where each one falls short

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

Proto.io

  • Prototypes live in the vendor cloud and offline export is a higher-tier feature, so the ability to archive completed client work is a plan-level decision rather than a given.
  • Design is done elsewhere and interaction is rebuilt here, so every change to the visual design has to be reapplied by hand and the two artefacts drift apart.
  • The event and condition model is layer based, so a genuinely complex flow becomes a large tree of triggers that nobody but its author can audit.
  • Editor seats are priced individually and viewer access is limited on lower plans, so opening review to a wide stakeholder group pushes you up a tier for people who never edit anything.
  • The market standardised on Figma, so hiring people who already know Proto.io is progressively harder and every new researcher is a training cost.

Womp

  • Everything runs through the browser graphics stack, so an older laptop with integrated graphics hits frame rate and render limits fast and there is no local rendering fallback.
  • Implicit modelling gives no control over the exported mesh, so the output topology is unsuitable for rigging, animation or subdivision work downstream.
  • Nothing is dimensionally accurate, so a form designed here has to be remodelled in CAD before it can be manufactured.
  • Scenes live in the vendor account, so if the service changes or closes, the only copies you hold are whatever you exported in advance.
  • The material and lighting set is deliberately simplified, which caps art direction and makes the output visually recognisable as having come from Womp.

Pricing, plan by plan

Proto.io

On request
  • Freelancer$undefined/month
    • Single editor
    • Limited active projects
    • Standard sharing
  • Startup$undefined/month
    • Multiple editors
    • More projects
    • Team library
  • Agency$undefined/month
    • Higher project and storage limits
    • Client sharing controls
  • Corporate$undefined/month
    • Largest quotas
    • Offline export on higher tiers
    • Priority support

Womp

Free
  • Free$undefined/month
    • Public scenes
    • Limited render resolution
    • Limited storage
  • Pro$undefined/month
    • Private scenes
    • Higher render resolution
    • Mesh export and larger storage

Which should you pick?

Choose Proto.io if

  • You need event and condition system.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want timeline animation.
Proto.io review

Choose Womp if

  • You need implicit surface modelling.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want browser rendering.
Womp review

Questions people ask

Is Proto.io or Womp better?
Neither clearly leads. Proto.io starts at On request and Womp at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Proto.io or Womp?
Womp has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Proto.io and Free for Womp.
Does Proto.io or Womp run on more platforms?
Proto.io runs on Web, iOS, Android. Womp runs on Web.
Can I use Womp for free?
Yes. Womp has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Proto.io starts at On request.
What is Proto.io best used for?
Proto.io is most often used for running usability tests where the prototype must respond to real input rather than replay a fixed click path, demonstrating a form-heavy or data-driven flow to stakeholders before any code exists, testing a mobile interaction on the physical device it is designed for, with correct gesture behaviour, validating a concept for a client who needs to feel the product, not watch a video of it. Of those, running usability tests where the prototype must respond to real input rather than replay a fixed click path and demonstrating a form-heavy or data-driven flow to stakeholders before any code exists are not what Womp is typically brought in for.
What can Proto.io do that Womp cannot?
Proto.io covers Event and condition system, Timeline animation, Device preview, Component library. Womp covers Implicit surface modelling, Browser rendering, Material library, Scene sharing.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Proto.io: Can it replace Figma?

No. It has no design system or file-handoff role. It sits alongside Figma for the prototypes Figma cannot express.

Womp: Do I need to know 3D to use it?

No. That is the point of the modelling approach; there is no topology, edge flow or subdivision to understand.

Proto.io: What happens to prototypes if we stop paying?

They stop being accessible unless you have exported them, and offline export is restricted to higher plans, so plan archiving before you cancel.

Womp: Can I use the meshes in Blender or a game engine?

You can export them, but the topology comes from tessellating an implicit surface, so it is not suitable for rigging, animation or subdivision without a retopology pass.

Proto.io: Is it worth learning now that InVision has gone?

If your work is usability research on conditional flows, yes. If you need click-through demos of static screens, Figma already does that at no extra cost.

Womp: Is it accurate enough for manufacturing?

No. It is a visual tool. Anything to be made needs remodelling in CAD.

Share

Related pages

More on Proto.io

More on Womp

Keep looking

Other head to heads