Softwr

Research · head to head

Schrodinger vs Terra

Schrodinger logo

Schrodinger

Research

Physics based molecular modelling and drug discovery software, licensed by token pool

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Terra logo

Terra

Research

Open biomedical research platform for genomic analysis, priced only by the cloud you consume

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Terra has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Schrodinger licences are sold as token pools rather than unlimited module access, so a department can be blocked mid campaign because colleagues are consuming concurrency, and expanding the pool is a new commercial negotiation rather than a setting.; Terra the absence of a licence fee hides the real cost driver: an idle notebook virtual machine left running overnight, or a workspace bucket full of intermediate workflow outputs, quietly consumes grant money with no vendor invoice to prompt a review.
  • They diverge on capability: Schrodinger covers Maestro, Terra covers No platform licence fee.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Schrodinger and Terra actually diverge.

Attributes where Schrodinger and Terra differ
AttributeSchrodingerTerra
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, WebWeb, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Research).

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 Schrodinger

  • Maestro
  • Glide
  • FEP+
  • Desmond
  • Jaguar
  • LiveDesign
  • Materials Science suite

Only in Terra

  • No platform licence fee
  • Cloud pass-through billing
  • WDL workflow execution
  • Notebook environments
  • Controlled-access data
  • Workspace sharing
  • Compliance posture
  • Multi-cloud

What people use each for

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

Schrodinger

  • A medicinal chemistry programme using FEP+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licencenot Terra
  • A structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structurenot Terra
  • A materials group modelling polymer or electrolyte properties before committing to formulation experimentsnot Terra
  • A university modelling group that qualifies for the published academic site licence and needs Maestro across a teaching and research cohortnot Terra

Terra

  • A genomics lab running whole-genome alignment and variant calling pipelines without provisioning or maintaining a local clusternot Schrodinger
  • A consortium sharing controlled-access human data across institutions where the data cannot be copied to each sitenot Schrodinger
  • A health system analysing patient genomic data under a HIPAA business associate agreementnot Schrodinger
  • A federal or federally funded project needing FedRAMP Moderate authorisation for its analysis environmentnot Schrodinger

Where each one falls short

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

Schrodinger

  • Licences are sold as token pools rather than unlimited module access, so a department can be blocked mid campaign because colleagues are consuming concurrency, and expanding the pool is a new commercial negotiation rather than a setting.
  • Commercial pricing is not published and is negotiated against modules, cores and term, so two companies of similar size can pay very different amounts and neither can benchmark the other.
  • FEP+ needs substantial GPU capacity that is not included in the licence, so the real annual cost includes cloud or on premise hardware that often rivals the software line item.
  • The tools require trained computational chemists to produce trustworthy results, and an organisation without that function will generate predictions it cannot interpret or defend to its own medicinal chemists.
  • Schrodinger runs its own internal drug discovery pipeline alongside selling software to discovery companies, and some prospective customers treat that dual role as a conflict when discussing proprietary targets, which slows procurement even where contractual separation exists.

Terra

  • The absence of a licence fee hides the real cost driver: an idle notebook virtual machine left running overnight, or a workspace bucket full of intermediate workflow outputs, quietly consumes grant money with no vendor invoice to prompt a review.
  • Cost governance is entirely the customer responsibility, and grant-funded groups without a cloud engineer routinely overspend before anyone reads the Google or Azure bill in enough detail to find the cause.
  • It assumes genuine bioinformatics competence: writing or adapting WDL workflows, managing data tables and debugging failed tasks are all on you, so a wet lab without computational staff cannot use it productively.
  • Feature parity between the Google Cloud and Azure deployments is not identical, so a decision on cloud provider constrains which capabilities and datasets you can reach and is expensive to reverse later.
  • It is a research platform rather than a regulated clinical system: it is not a validated GxP environment and does not carry the qualification package a diagnostic or submission workflow would require, so clinical use needs additional infrastructure and validation you provide yourself.

Pricing, plan by plan

Schrodinger

On request
  • Commercial licence$undefined/year
    • Quoted per customer against modules, cores and licence term
    • Applications draw from a shared token pool that caps concurrency
    • GPU compute for FEP+ and Desmond is a separate cost, on premise or cloud
  • Academic site licence$undefined/year
    • Published academic entry around 7,500 USD a year for a premium package with a token allocation
    • Restricted to academic and research use, not work supporting a commercial enterprise
    • Maestro generally unrestricted with tokens shared for compute heavy applications

Terra

Free
  • Terra platformFree
    • No charge for the platform, administration, security controls or frontline support
    • Workspaces, workflow execution and notebook environments included
    • Available on Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure
  • Cloud consumption$undefined/month
    • Google Cloud or Azure charges passed through at cost with no markup
    • Running notebook virtual machines around 0.22 USD per hour, roughly 0.027 USD per hour when paused
    • Storage billed continuously on workspace buckets and intermediate workflow outputs

Which should you pick?

Choose Schrodinger if

  • You need maestro.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web.
  • You also want glide.
Schrodinger review

Choose Terra if

  • You need no platform licence fee.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure.
  • You also want cloud pass-through billing.
Terra review

Questions people ask

Is Schrodinger or Terra better?
Neither clearly leads. Schrodinger starts at On request and Terra at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Schrodinger or Terra?
Terra has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Schrodinger and Free for Terra.
Does Schrodinger or Terra run on more platforms?
Schrodinger runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web. Terra runs on Web, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure.
Can I use Terra for free?
Yes. Terra has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Schrodinger starts at On request.
What is Schrodinger best used for?
Schrodinger is most often used for a medicinal chemistry programme using fep+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licence, a structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structure, a materials group modelling polymer or electrolyte properties before committing to formulation experiments, a university modelling group that qualifies for the published academic site licence and needs maestro across a teaching and research cohort. Of those, a medicinal chemistry programme using fep+ to prioritise which analogues to synthesise, where avoiding a handful of wasted syntheses pays for the licence and a structure based design campaign that needs docking at scale against a target with a good crystal structure are not what Terra is typically brought in for.
What can Schrodinger do that Terra cannot?
Schrodinger covers Maestro, Glide, FEP+, Desmond. Terra covers No platform licence fee, Cloud pass-through billing, WDL workflow execution, Notebook environments.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Schrodinger: How is Schrodinger software licensed?

Annual licences with a shared token pool. Tokens cap how much you can run at once rather than which modules you own outright.

Terra: Is Terra really free?

The platform is. There is no licence fee. Everything you pay is Google Cloud or Azure compute, storage and egress, passed through at cost.

Schrodinger: Is there published pricing?

Only for academic site licences, which start around 7,500 USD a year for a premium package. Commercial pricing is quoted.

Terra: What actually drives the bill?

Running virtual machines and stored data. Pausing notebooks drops a virtual machine from about 0.22 to about 0.027 dollars an hour, and deleting intermediate workflow outputs is the other main saving.

Schrodinger: Do I need my own GPUs?

For FEP+ and Desmond in practice yes, or cloud GPU capacity. Compute is not included in the licence.

Terra: Can I use it with protected health information?

Yes. Terra signs HIPAA business associate agreements and GDPR data processing agreements, and the Azure deployment holds FedRAMP Moderate authorisation.

Schrodinger: Does Schrodinger compete with its customers?

It runs its own drug pipeline as well as selling software. It manages this through contractual separation, but buyers with sensitive targets should raise it during procurement.

Terra: Is it validated for clinical or GxP use?

No. It is a research platform. Regulated clinical or submission workflows need validation and controls you build yourself.

Share

Related pages

More on Schrodinger

More on Terra

Keep looking

Other head to heads