Comparison

host.video vs Loom

Different tools for different jobs.

Quick Comparison

Feature host.video Loom
Primary use case Video hosting, management, and embedding Async video messaging for teams
Video library management Full library with folders, search, analytics Recording library (messaging-focused)
White-label embeds Zero branding, custom domains Loom branding on embeds
AI search inside videos Included on all plans Not available
Custom domains Included on Business plan Not available
Long-form video Designed for any length Designed for short async messages
Password protection Included Limited access controls
HLS adaptive streaming Included on all plans Standard playback

Where host.video Wins

Built for video hosting, not messaging

Loom is a video messaging tool for async team communication — quick screen recordings shared via link. It is not designed for hosting product demos, training libraries, course content, or embedded video on websites. host.video is purpose-built for hosting, managing, and delivering video at scale with white-label embeds, custom domains, and AI search.

White-label embeds on your domain

Loom embeds carry Loom branding and serve from Loom domains. host.video provides a white-label player with zero branding, served from your own custom domain with auto-SSL. Your videos look like part of your product, not someone else's.

Searchable video library

host.video automatically transcribes every upload and makes your entire library searchable. Loom is designed for short-form messages, not building a searchable knowledge base of long-form video content.

Where Loom Wins

Async video messaging and recording

Loom is best-in-class for quick async video messages. Screen recording, webcam capture, and instant sharing are seamless. Acquired by Atlassian in 2023, Loom integrates deeply with Jira, Confluence, and the broader Atlassian ecosystem. For team communication via video, Loom is the right tool.

Massive adoption and familiarity

Loom has enormous user adoption for async communication. Most knowledge workers have seen or received a Loom video. That familiarity and low friction for quick recordings is a genuine advantage for team communication.

Pricing Comparison

These tools solve different problems, so direct pricing comparison is of limited value. Loom offers a free tier for short recordings and paid plans for teams. host.video starts at $20/mo ($200/yr) for 200 GB storage, 2 TB bandwidth, AI search, transcription, and a white-label player. The real question is whether you need a video messaging tool (Loom) or a video hosting platform (host.video). Many teams use both — Loom for internal communication and host.video for external-facing video.

Who Should Choose Loom

Choose Loom if your primary need is quick async video messages for internal team communication — bug reports, standup updates, quick explanations. If you are already in the Atlassian ecosystem (Jira, Confluence) and want tight integration, Loom is purpose-built for that workflow.

Who Should Choose host.video

Choose host.video if you need to host, manage, and embed a library of videos on your website, product, or client portals. If you need white-label embeds on a custom domain, AI search across your video library, password protection, or analytics beyond simple view counts, host.video is the right tool. Loom and host.video are complementary — Loom for recording messages, host.video for hosting your video library.

Try host.video free

14-day free trial. No surprise bills.

Start your free trial