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.
Joplin vs Evernote
Context: Note-taking Apps · methodology v1.0.0 · 37 rows
Joplin
Not in current ranking
Evernote
#3 · 73/100 · Ranked
| Attribute | JoplinJoplin | EvernoteEvernote (Bending Spoons) |
|---|---|---|
| Identity · Taxonomy | ||
| Documentation | https://joplinapp.org/help/ | https://help.evernote.com/ |
| Tags | open-source, markdown, encryption, self-hosted | note-taking, cross-platform, sync, encryption |
| Platform · Deployment | ||
| Delivery model | desktop, mobile, self-hosted | SaaS, desktop, mobile |
| Desktop apps | Windows, macOS, Linux | Windows, macOS |
| Mobile apps | — | iOS, Android |
| Operating systems | — | Windows, macOS |
| Pricing · Licensing | ||
| Free plan | true | true |
| Free trial | true | true |
| License model | open-source | proprietary, subscription |
| Open source | — | false |
| Pricing model | free, subscription | free, subscription |
| Source repository | https://github.com/laurent22/joplin | — |
| SPDX license IDs | AGPL-3.0-or-later | — |
| Trial length | 14 | 7 |
| Features · Product · Fit | ||
| Core capabilities | Markdown and rich text notes, End-to-end encrypted sync, Web clipper for Chrome and Firefox, Plugin system with extension API, Note publishing to the web, Self-hosted Joplin Server option | 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 |
| Api · Integrations · Ecosystem | ||
| API available | true | true |
| CLI | true | — |
| Security · Privacy · Compliance | ||
| Regulatory compliance | GDPR | — |
| Audience · Use · Case | ||
| Best for | Users who want an open-source, encryption-first notes app that works with their own cloud storage or the hosted Joplin Cloud. | Individuals and teams that want a mature, cross-platform note repository with tiered storage limits and enterprise controls. |
| Company-size fit | individual, SMB, mid-market | individual, SMB, enterprise |
| Primary use cases | Private note taking, Cross-device note sync, Self-hosted note management | Personal note taking, Team knowledge management |
| Skill level | intermediate | beginner |
| Lifecycle · Versioning | ||
| Maintenance status | active | active |
| Vendor · Maintainer | ||
| Founded year | 2017 | 2007 |
| Vendor type | community | 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.