What They Actually Cost

All four vendors offer free and paid editions, but the included functionality, user limits, and billing structures differ.

The following figures reflect published US pricing as of November 12, 2026.

Paid prices are shown per user, per month, billed annually, unless otherwise indicated.

Current subscription comparison

US annual-billing list prices checked November 12, 2026. Teamwork paid editions have minimum-seat requirements. Wrike Team supports 2–15 users. Trello Enterprise pricing varies by purchased seat count. Enterprise and custom plans require vendor quotes. Sources: Zoho Projects pricing , Trello pricing , Teamwork pricing , and Wrike pricing .

Zoho Projects pricing by edition

Premium includes the core project-management and financial features that many service businesses need.

These include time logs, timesheet approvals, project budgets, and earned value management.

Critical path and baselines are not included in the Premium edition.

Those advanced scheduling capabilities are included from Enterprise, at $9 per user per month on annual billing.

Ultimate adds more advanced resource, timesheet, reporting, and automation functionality.

Businesses should select the edition based on their required project controls, rather than assuming every feature is available on the $4 subscription.

Trello pricing by edition

Trello Standard costs $5 per user per month on annual billing, or $6 with monthly billing.

Trello Premium costs $10 per user per month on annual billing, or $12.50 with monthly billing.

Enterprise pricing depends on the number of purchased seats.

Trello's Free plan can be sufficient for small teams working with simple boards, cards, checklists, and assignments.

Standard adds more flexibility without introducing the full complexity of a dedicated project-delivery platform.

Premium is more appropriate when teams need additional work views, dashboards, and automation allowances.

Teamwork's current pricing structure

Teamwork has updated its subscription lineup.

The older Deliver, Grow, and Scale editions should not be used as the default new-customer comparison.

Its current lineup is Free, Basics, Accelerate, Optimize, and Enterprise.

Teamwork Free already includes time logging.

Basics expands the client-services workflow, including billable time and additional collaboration features.

Accelerate adds more comprehensive timesheet, capacity, time-budgeting, and invoicing functionality.

Optimize is the current edition to evaluate for dedicated client and project profitability reporting.

It adds financial budgets, forecasting, revenue and cost visibility, and more detailed profitability management.

Since Optimize is custom-priced, the final subscription cost needs to be established through a vendor quote.

Wrike pricing and user limits

Wrike's updated pricing makes the Team plan attractive for organizations with up to fifteen users.

However, the Team edition cannot accommodate a sixteenth user.

At that point, the business needs to evaluate Business or another eligible higher edition.

Business includes additional capabilities, but it also increases the published seat price from $10 to $25 per month.

The distinction is especially important for organizations approaching the user limit.

What Wrike's 15-user threshold actually costs

Consider a growing organization with fifteen employees using Wrike Team.

At $10 per user per month, the annual subscription is $1,800.

If the team grows to sixteen paid users, the organization no longer fits the Team plan's published user limit.

At Wrike Business pricing, sixteen users cost $4,800 annually.

Published annual-billing prices, assuming all users are paid seats. Excludes negotiated discounts, taxes, implementation, and additional services. Wrike Business includes additional functionality, so the plans are not feature-equivalent.

The move from fifteen Team users to sixteen Business users increases the annual subscription by $3,000.

That is approximately a 167% increase in total annual subscription cost.

The higher plan includes more features, but the upgrade may be triggered by headcount rather than the organization's need for those features.

If you expect to grow beyond fifteen users, model Wrike Business pricing before selecting Team.

Annual Cost for 20 Users

A twenty-person team makes the difference in published subscription pricing easier to understand.

The following example uses annual billing and the available paid subscription editions.

Subscription-only illustration using published annual-billing rates. Wrike Team is excluded because it cannot support twenty users. Plans are not feature-equivalent. Excludes taxes, implementation, integrations, optional features, and negotiated pricing.

Zoho Projects Premium has the lowest published paid entry price among the four products.

But that does not automatically make it the best choice for every organization.

Trello may be sufficient for a team that only needs simple visual task management.

Teamwork may justify its additional cost through client-service and profitability workflows.

Wrike may justify its price through advanced work management, approvals, and creative proofing.

The software should be evaluated against the business processes it is expected to support.

Trello: Visual Task Management

Trello's main advantage is its straightforward board-and-card approach to managing work.

Teams organize cards into lists, assign members, add checklists, set due dates, and move work through a visual process.

This can be effective for departments coordinating recurring tasks, internal requests, marketing calendars, and simple projects.

Trello does not need to be the most sophisticated product to be the right product.

A small team with straightforward work may benefit more from a lightweight board that everyone updates than from a more complicated project-management system.

Where Trello wins

Trello is particularly attractive when visual simplicity and low administration are more important than advanced scheduling or financial reporting.

Its Free plan supports up to ten collaborators and ten boards per workspace.

Standard costs $5 per user per month on annual billing and includes unlimited boards, custom fields, and advanced checklists.

Premium adds Calendar, Timeline, Table, Dashboard, and Map views, along with unlimited automation runs.

Trello also supports Power-Ups and integrations that extend its basic capabilities.

Where Trello falls short

Trello is not designed around the same detailed project-delivery and financial controls found in Zoho Projects.

It does not include native critical-path scheduling, comprehensive timesheets, or project job costing comparable to dedicated project-management platforms.

Dependencies are possible through linked cards, checklists, automation, and Power-Ups.

However, these approaches do not provide the same integrated dependency scheduling as a dedicated Gantt-based project system.

Time tracking can also be added through suitable Power-Ups and integrations.

The additional functionality may be sufficient for some businesses, but should be evaluated alongside the added licensing and administration.

For teams managing complex dependencies, approved billable hours, project budgets, or detailed client delivery, a more specialized platform may be appropriate.

Teamwork: Built for Client Services

Teamwork is the most direct professional-services competitor to Zoho Projects in this comparison.

Its current lineup emphasizes client projects, billable time, resource planning, delivery management, and profitability.

These requirements are particularly relevant to marketing agencies, consultancies, implementation firms, and other service providers.

Time tracking starts on Free

Teamwork Free supports time logging for up to five users and five projects.

Basics adds client-focused collaboration features and billable time tracking.

Accelerate adds more extensive timesheet, capacity planning, time-budgeting, and invoicing functionality.

This makes Teamwork a credible alternative for organizations billing clients for completed work.

But the exact features available depend on the edition.

Profitability requires Optimize

Teamwork's strongest differentiator for agencies is its focus on financial performance across clients and projects.

Optimize provides more specialized profitability capabilities, including:

• Client-level profitability
• Project revenue and cost reporting
• Financial budgets
• Margin analysis
• Profitability forecasting
• Timesheet approvals

For agencies that review margin per client or profitability per project every week, these features may justify a higher subscription price.

However, Teamwork Optimize is custom-priced.

The current Grow edition pricing from older comparisons should not be used as a substitute for an actual Optimize quote.

Zoho Projects Premium also includes project budgets and earned value management.

The distinction is that Teamwork Optimize provides a more specialized professional-services profitability environment.

It is not accurate to say Zoho Projects has no project financial management.

Teamwork also supports creative proofing

Teamwork includes proofing functionality, with different allowances depending on the edition.

For an agency managing client creative, Teamwork's combination of project delivery, billing, and proofing may be particularly useful.

This also means Wrike is not the only platform in the comparison with formal creative-review capabilities.

Where Teamwork falls short

Teamwork's more advanced professional-services capabilities come at a higher cost.

Basics costs $9.99 per user per month on annual billing.

Accelerate costs $24.99 per user per month.

Optimize requires a custom quote.

Those prices should be compared against the additional revenue, cost, and profitability visibility the organization expects to gain.

Teamwork also operates within a broader software environment.

Organizations using separate CRM, accounting, and support systems should evaluate the available integrations and any additional costs.

Teamwork's professional-services focus may justify its premium, but it should be selected for the actual workflows the organization needs.

Wrike: Advanced Work Management

Wrike is designed for organizations with sophisticated project coordination, resource management, and approval requirements.

It can be particularly relevant for creative teams, marketing departments, and businesses managing work across multiple functions.

Creative proofing and approvals

Wrike offers extensive creative-review functionality on eligible editions.

These capabilities include:

• File annotations
• Image and document proofing
• Video review
• Version comparisons
• Assigned reviewers
• Formal approval statuses
• Review and sign-off workflows

This can help organizations manage design approvals, campaign assets, creative versions, and compliance-related review.

Advanced proofing and approvals require Wrike Business or a higher edition.

They are not included in the same form on the $10 Team plan.

The relevant published starting price for this comparison is therefore $25 per user per month, billed annually.

Teamwork also offers creative proofing, so agencies should compare the actual review and approval workflows rather than assuming only one product provides them.

Cross-functional work management

Wrike supports complex project structures and coordination across multiple departments.

Its work-management features can help teams organize projects, tasks, dependencies, resource assignments, and approvals.

Wrike also supports cross-tagging, allowing work to appear in multiple relevant project contexts without creating entirely separate duplicate tasks.

This can be useful for organizations managing work across marketing, product, operations, and other functions.

More advanced enterprise editions expand reporting, administration, security, and resource-management functionality.

Where Wrike falls short

Wrike's main drawback for smaller organizations is the relationship between its pricing and user limits.

Team costs $10 per user per month but is limited to fifteen users.

Business costs $25 and supports larger teams.

The move from fifteen Team seats to sixteen Business seats increases the published annual subscription from $1,800 to $4,800.

Organizations near that threshold should plan for the higher edition before committing.

Wrike may also require more extensive configuration than a lightweight board-based tool.

That is reasonable for organizations with complex work-management needs, but it may be unnecessary for teams with simple projects.

Where Zoho Projects Fits

Zoho Projects occupies a different position from the other three products.

It combines structured project delivery with timesheets, budgets, automation, and native connections to other Zoho applications.

Its greatest advantage is the combination of those capabilities with relatively low per-user subscription pricing.

Structured project delivery at $4

Zoho Projects Premium costs $4 per user per month on annual billing.

The edition includes unlimited projects, timesheets, multi-level timesheet approvals, project budgets, and earned value management.

It supports task assignments, milestones, dependencies, workflow automation, and collaboration.

Critical path and baselines require Enterprise, at $9 per user per month.

That distinction matters for organizations requiring advanced scheduling and schedule-performance analysis.

Even with Enterprise, the published subscription price remains below several competing higher-level editions.

Timesheets and project budgets

Zoho Projects Premium includes time logs and timesheets.

Employees can record time against tasks and issues.

Managers can review and approve submitted time entries.

Project budgets can track planned versus actual effort or cost, helping organizations monitor project performance.

Earned value management provides additional visibility into performance against the project plan.

For consulting firms, implementation partners, agencies, and other service businesses, these features can be important to project profitability.

Billable time can reach invoicing

Zoho Projects provides native integrations with Zoho Books, Zoho Invoice, and other supported Zoho financial applications.

With the appropriate integration configured, eligible project information and approved billable time can synchronize into the financial application.

Those records can then support customer invoice creation.

This is not automatic without configuration.

The organization needs appropriate financial-app access, customer mappings, permissions, approved time entries, and billing settings.

Zoho Projects itself is not a complete accounting application.

The advantage is the native connection between project delivery and the Zoho financial ecosystem.

Teamwork also supports invoicing workflows, particularly on Accelerate and higher editions.

Trello and Wrike may require external integrations or downstream processes for comparable time-to-invoice workflows.

No fifteen-user pricing cliff

Zoho Projects does not impose a Wrike Team-style fifteen-user cap on its Premium edition.

Its published per-user subscription price remains $4 on annual billing as the team grows, subject to the vendor's licensing terms.

This can make subscription planning more predictable for growing organizations.

However, additional capabilities may still require a higher Zoho edition.

For example, an organization needing critical path, baselines, or portfolio dashboards should evaluate Enterprise at $9.

The absence of a comparable user cap does not mean every Zoho Projects feature is included in Premium.

Connected Zoho applications

Zoho Projects integrates with other Zoho products, including CRM, Books, Invoice, Desk, Analytics, and collaboration applications.

This can help connect project delivery to the surrounding business processes.

For example, a business may manage an opportunity in Zoho CRM, deliver the project in Zoho Projects, and invoice approved billable work through Zoho Books.

These applications do not automatically operate as one shared database.

Their integrations require supported connections, record mappings, permissions, and configuration.

A closed CRM deal does not automatically become a project unless an appropriate automation or integration has been configured.

The benefit is the availability of native integrations within the Zoho ecosystem, rather than an absence of integration requirements.

Which One Fits You?

The most useful comparison is not the longest feature list.

It is the platform that fits the organization's actual delivery, collaboration, approval, and financial workflows.

No single platform wins every category.

Trello can be the most practical solution for simple work, even without extensive scheduling or financial capabilities.

Teamwork's professional-services focus may justify a higher subscription price for agencies.

Wrike can be the stronger fit for sophisticated creative approvals and cross-functional work.

And Zoho Projects provides a compelling combination of project structure, time tracking, budgets, and native financial integration at a lower entry price.

What Switching Involves

Zenatta's project-management migration precedent is more limited than our CRM and accounting implementation experience.

We would rather make that distinction clear than imply extensive firsthand migrations from every platform in this comparison.

The main challenge is not simply transferring task names.

It is preserving project structure, comments, files, time logs, custom fields, dependencies, and workflow behavior.

Each source application provides different export capabilities, so migration planning needs to be platform-specific.

What the source platforms can export

The source application's export format determines how much historical information can be preserved without additional API or custom migration work.

Exporting information does not guarantee that the destination can import it with identical relationships or history.

• Export tasks and map the project structure Trello boards, Teamwork projects, and Wrike folders do not use identical data structures. Zoho Projects has its own project, milestone, task-list, and task hierarchy. Document how the source structure should map into the destination. Zoho Projects supports task imports from XLS, CSV, JSON, and Microsoft Project formats. Its documented task-import limit is 5,000 tasks per import. Validate subtasks, dependencies, assignees, statuses, and dates before migrating the complete environment.
• Preserve comments and project history Historical comments require different handling depending on the source. Teamwork can include comments in supported PDF project reports. Wrike's standard Excel export does not include comments. Trello's JSON export can preserve additional card history depending on the records and export method. Even when comments are successfully exported, Zoho Projects may not recreate them automatically as native discussions with identical authorship, timestamps, and formatting. On a separate Smartsheet-to-Zoho Projects engagement, Zenatta found that adding historical comments to synchronized tasks was a distinct piece of work after the tasks themselves were transferred. That was a Smartsheet engagement, not a claimed migration from Trello, Teamwork, or Wrike. It illustrates why task history requires separate planning.
• Retrieve attachments and supporting files Standard task exports may contain file references or links rather than the original attachment files. Identify important project documents, creative assets, proofs, screenshots, and other attachments. Download the original files using supported export methods or APIs where necessary. Map each file to the appropriate destination task or project. Confirm that permissions, filenames, and important relationships survive the migration.
• Migrate historical time logs where appropriate Historical time entries do not necessarily need to remain in the old system. Zoho Projects supports separate time-log imports using CSV, XLS, and XLSX files. The documented limit is 5,000 rows per import, including the header. Import mapping must account for users, tasks, issues, dates, durations, and billable status. The available source export determines how much historical time data can be migrated accurately. If the information cannot be imported with sufficient fidelity, preserve it separately for reporting and audit purposes. Select a clear cutover date to avoid duplicate or missing time entries.
• Rebuild custom fields and workflow automation Source custom fields, project statuses, rules, and automations do not automatically become equivalent Zoho Projects functionality. Document which fields and workflows are actually used. Create the necessary destination fields and map supported values. Rebuild important automation rules, notifications, and approval processes. This is also an opportunity to retire unused or redundant workflows instead of reproducing unnecessary complexity.
• Validate budgets and billing before cutover Financial migration requires particular care when the source system contains approved time, project budgets, or client billing information. Confirm which application is authoritative for invoicing and financial records. Preserve historical project budgets, rates, and relevant profitability reports. Validate any newly configured Zoho Books or Zoho Invoice integration. Reconcile approved billable time before allowing the new workflow to produce invoices.
• Test the destination before retiring the source Begin with representative projects rather than migrating the entire organization immediately. Confirm project structure, tasks, dependencies, assignments, comments, attachments, time entries, budgets, and automations. Verify permissions and required integrations. Keep the original project data accessible until the migration has been reconciled and approved.

The appropriate migration effort depends on the source platform, the volume of data, the required historical fidelity, and the workflows being replaced.

A task export is not the same thing as a complete operational migration.

For some organizations, preserving the existing platform and integrating selected data may be less disruptive than replacing the entire work-management system.

Common Questions