Compare against
uplika vs Postiz
Postiz is the only one here you can run yourself. It is AGPL-3.0 and the project states there is currently no feature difference between the hosted and self-hosted versions, though the cloud plans cap connected channels and self-hosting does not. Its MCP server exposes thirteen tools to agents and accepts an API key or an OAuth token, but it publishes no OAuth discovery metadata, so an agent cannot register itself the way it does with ours. Its homepage counts 30+ channels and its documentation 34; we cite the documentation figure.
What publishes today
Threads, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Bluesky, Telegram. Naver Blog publishes through the uplika Chrome extension in your own browser. TikTok is waiting on platform review: its real limits are listed so you can build against them now, and publishing there is refused rather than dropped quietly. We list fewer channels than the products below. If you need one we do not have, they cover more.
How they describe themselves
The ultimate agentic social media scheduling tool
Their sentence, unedited. Summarising a competitor's own positioning is how it gets bent.
Side by side
| uplika | Postiz | |
|---|---|---|
| Channels listed | 8 | 34 |
| Publishing today | Threads, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Bluesky, Telegram | 34 |
| Free tier | Yes | No |
| Paid starts at | $10/mo | $29/mo |
| Billed per | Workspace | Workspace |
| MCP server | Yes | Yes |
| Agent authentication | OAuth, client registers itself | API key or OAuth |
| MCP tools | 61 | 13 |
| Open source | No | AGPL-3.0 |
| Interface languages | en, ko | en |
Checked on 2026-09-29 · Prices and channel lists change. If that date looks old, trust their page over ours.
Sources
These are the pages we read, not a bibliography we assembled afterwards. Open them and check.