Compare tools
Pick 2–5 published tools. Values come from our evidence-checked profiles — an em-dash means unknown, never “no”. Ranking rows reflect the current published methodology for the comparison context.
Evernote vs Capacities
Context: Note-taking Apps · methodology v1.0.0 · 36 rows
Evernote
#3 · 73/100 · Ranked
Capacities
Not in current ranking
| Attribute | EvernoteEvernote (Bending Spoons) | CapacitiesCapacities |
|---|---|---|
| Identity · Taxonomy | ||
| Documentation | https://help.evernote.com/ | https://docs.capacities.io |
| Tags | note-taking, cross-platform, sync, encryption | pkm, objects, daily-notes, ai |
| Platform · Deployment | ||
| Delivery model | SaaS, desktop, mobile | SaaS, desktop, mobile |
| Desktop apps | Windows, macOS | Windows, macOS, Linux |
| Mobile apps | iOS, Android | — |
| Operating systems | Windows, macOS | — |
| Pricing · Licensing | ||
| Free plan | true | true |
| Free trial | true | true |
| License model | proprietary, subscription | — |
| Open source | false | — |
| Pricing model | free, subscription | free, subscription |
| Starting price | — | 9.99 |
| Trial length | 7 | — |
| Features · Product · Fit | ||
| Core capabilities | Note and notebook management, Cross-device sync, In-note encryption and two-factor authentication, Single sign-on on Enterprise plan, Calendar connection, Connectivity to AI tools via MCP | Custom object types, Daily notes, Bidirectional links and backlinks, AI assistant, Smart queries, Full data export to standard formats |
| Api · Integrations · Ecosystem | ||
| API available | true | true |
| Security · Privacy · Compliance | ||
| Regulatory compliance | — | GDPR |
| Audience · Use · Case | ||
| Best for | Individuals and teams that want a mature, cross-platform note repository with tiered storage limits and enterprise controls. | Writers and individual users who prefer organizing knowledge as connected objects rather than files and folders. |
| Company-size fit | individual, SMB, enterprise | individual |
| Primary use cases | Personal note taking, Team knowledge management | Personal knowledge management, Writing |
| Skill level | beginner | intermediate |
| Lifecycle · Versioning | ||
| Maintenance status | active | active |
| Vendor · Maintainer | ||
| Founded year | 2007 | — |
| Headquarters country | — | Germany |
| Vendor type | commercial | commercial |
| Ranking factors (current methodology) | ||
| Note-taking Apps — core capability coverage score/100 | 76.0 | — |
| Note-taking Apps — outcome quality score/100 | 74.0 | — |
| Note-taking Apps — advanced workflow depth score/100 | 70.0 | — |
| Note-taking Apps — domain interoperability score/100 | 68.0 | — |
| Note-taking Apps — scale / capacity score/100 | 72.0 | — |
| Usability & adoption/100 | 78.0 | — |
| Reliability & performance/100 | 76.0 | — |
| Security, privacy & compliance/100 | 66.0 | — |
| Interoperability & ecosystem/100 | 70.0 | — |
| Value & total cost/100 | 70.0 | — |
| Support & documentation/100 | 76.0 | — |
| Evidence confidence/100 | 72.0 | — |
“—” means unknown (we never treat missing evidence as a negative). Cells reflect each value's current evidence state; superseded or stale values are excluded. Ranking rows are editorial assessments under the cited methodology version — see the Note-taking Apps category for definitions.