Softwr

CAD · head to head

CoreTechnologie vs Zoo

CoreTechnologie logo

CoreTechnologie

CAD

CAD format conversion, validation and additive build preparation from a German independent

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Zoo logo

Zoo

CAD

Cloud CAD with a scripting language and a geometry engine exposed as an API

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Zoo has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: CoreTechnologie no pricing is published and the vendor sells through direct and regional channels, so there is no list price to anchor a negotiation and quotes differ by territory.; Zoo the geometry engine runs entirely in Zoo's cloud and there is no offline mode, so an aircraft, a customer site with no guest wifi or an outage stops modelling work completely.
  • They diverge on capability: CoreTechnologie covers Native CAD conversion, Zoo covers KCL scripting.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which CoreTechnologie and Zoo actually diverge.

Attributes where CoreTechnologie and Zoo differ
AttributeCoreTechnologieZoo
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquotePer user per month
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWindows, LinuxWeb, Windows, macOS, Linux, API

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

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 CoreTechnologie

  • Native CAD conversion
  • Automatic geometry healing
  • Feature recognition
  • Simplification and defeaturing
  • Batch and server conversion
  • 3D_Analyzer
  • 4D_Additive B-rep printing

Only in Zoo

  • KCL scripting
  • Design Studio
  • Design API
  • Zookeeper agent
  • Format conversion
  • Open source client

What people use each for

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

CoreTechnologie

  • A tier supplier that receives CATIA from one customer and NX from another and must work in SolidWorksnot Zoo
  • A company migrating a CAD library off one platform and needing feature-recognised, editable models rather than dumb solidsnot Zoo
  • Preparing additive builds from exact B-rep geometry where STL faceting would lose the tolerance you neednot Zoo
  • Giving purchasing and manufacturing staff a viewer with real analysis without buying them CAD seatsnot Zoo

Zoo

  • A hardware startup that wants part models reviewed in pull requests alongside firmwarenot CoreTechnologie
  • A software team generating thousands of parametric part variants programmatically rather than by handnot CoreTechnologie
  • A SaaS product that needs to render and convert customer CAD files without licensing a geometry kernelnot CoreTechnologie
  • An engineer who models occasional brackets and enclosures and does not want a four figure annual seatnot CoreTechnologie

Where each one falls short

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

CoreTechnologie

  • No pricing is published and the vendor sells through direct and regional channels, so there is no list price to anchor a negotiation and quotes differ by territory.
  • Licensing is granular by format read and write pair, so the price you were quoted covers the translations you named and adding a customer with a different CAD platform later means going back for another line item.
  • It is a small independent vendor, so a buyer standardising a critical migration pipeline on it should weigh the concentration risk and check the support arrangement in their own region rather than assume global coverage.
  • Feature recognition on converted geometry works well on prismatic machined parts and much less well on complex freeform surfaces, so the rebuilt-as-editable claim needs testing on your own worst parts, not on a demo model.
  • 4D_Additive competes with entrenched incumbents such as Magics in industrial AM, so machine-side Build Processor support and bureau familiarity are thinner, which matters if you need your service provider to accept the output.

Zoo

  • The geometry engine runs entirely in Zoo's cloud and there is no offline mode, so an aircraft, a customer site with no guest wifi or an outage stops modelling work completely.
  • STEP and SLDPRT import are still labelled experimental, which means the most common way of receiving a supplier or customer model is the least reliable path into the tool.
  • Drawing production, GD&T and tolerance annotation are far behind SolidWorks, Creo and NX, so most users still need a second package to release a manufacturing drawing.
  • Zookeeper is billed in reasoning minutes rather than per seat, so a team cannot forecast next month's bill from headcount the way it can with conventional CAD subscriptions.
  • The open source label applies only to the Design Studio client; the kernel that does the modelling is closed and hosted, so forking the repository does not give you a product you can run yourself.

Pricing, plan by plan

CoreTechnologie

On request
  • 3D_Evolution$undefined/year
    • Native CAD conversion across around 36 formats
    • Automatic healing and feature recognition
    • Simplification and defeaturing
  • 3D_Analyzer$undefined/year
    • Cross-format viewing and measurement
    • Wall thickness, draft and collision analysis
    • Model comparison
  • 4D_Additive$undefined/year
    • B-rep based build preparation
    • Texturing, nesting and lattice structures
    • Automatic part analysis for printability

Zoo

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Design Studio access
    • About 20 minutes of Zookeeper reasoning per month
    • Around $10 of API calls included
  • Plus$20/month
    • Roughly 400 Zookeeper minutes per month
    • Pay as you go beyond the allowance
    • Design Studio and API access
  • Pro$99/month
    • Unlimited Zookeeper reasoning
    • Higher API allowance
    • Priority support

Which should you pick?

Choose CoreTechnologie if

  • You need native cad conversion.
  • You work on Windows, Linux.
  • You also want automatic geometry healing.
CoreTechnologie review

Choose Zoo if

  • You need kcl scripting.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Windows, macOS, Linux, API.
  • You also want design studio.
Zoo review

Questions people ask

Is CoreTechnologie or Zoo better?
Neither clearly leads. CoreTechnologie starts at On request and Zoo at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, CoreTechnologie or Zoo?
Zoo has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for CoreTechnologie and Free for Zoo.
Does CoreTechnologie or Zoo run on more platforms?
CoreTechnologie runs on Windows, Linux. Zoo runs on Web, Windows, macOS, Linux, API.
Can I use Zoo for free?
Yes. Zoo has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. CoreTechnologie starts at On request.
What is CoreTechnologie best used for?
CoreTechnologie is most often used for a tier supplier that receives catia from one customer and nx from another and must work in solidworks, a company migrating a cad library off one platform and needing feature-recognised, editable models rather than dumb solids, preparing additive builds from exact b-rep geometry where stl faceting would lose the tolerance you need, giving purchasing and manufacturing staff a viewer with real analysis without buying them cad seats. Of those, a tier supplier that receives catia from one customer and nx from another and must work in solidworks and a company migrating a cad library off one platform and needing feature-recognised, editable models rather than dumb solids are not what Zoo is typically brought in for.
What can CoreTechnologie do that Zoo cannot?
CoreTechnologie covers Native CAD conversion, Automatic geometry healing, Feature recognition, Simplification and defeaturing. Zoo covers KCL scripting, Design Studio, Design API, Zookeeper agent.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

CoreTechnologie: Is CoreTechnologie owned by a CAD vendor?

No. It is an independent German company, which is the main reason it appears in supply chains that must move data between competing CAD platforms.

Zoo: Is Zoo the same company as KittyCAD?

Yes. KittyCAD renamed itself Zoo; the GitHub organisation is still KittyCAD and the scripting language KCL keeps the old initials.

CoreTechnologie: Does conversion produce editable models?

3D_Evolution has feature recognition that rebuilds parametric features from solids. It is reliable on prismatic machined geometry and weaker on complex freeform surfaces, so test it on your hardest parts.

Zoo: Can I use Zoo without an internet connection?

No. The geometry engine is a cloud service, so Design Studio needs a live connection to model anything.

CoreTechnologie: What makes 4D_Additive different from a normal slicer?

It prepares builds on exact B-rep geometry rather than converting to STL first, so tolerance and surface accuracy are not lost to faceting before printing.

Zoo: Is Design Studio free?

There is a genuine free tier with a small monthly allowance of AI reasoning and API calls. Paid plans start at $20 per month.

CoreTechnologie: Can it run unattended for large migrations?

Yes. Batch and server conversion is designed for high-volume migration and PLM pipeline use rather than desk-by-desk conversion.

Zoo: Can I replace SolidWorks with Zoo?

Not for drawing release, large assemblies or GD&T. Teams typically use Zoo for programmatic part generation and keep an established package for production documentation.

Share

Related pages

More on CoreTechnologie

More on Zoo

Keep looking

Other head to heads