Social media scheduling
Best open source alternatives to Contant 3 open-source tools, licences checked on GitHub
- Open-source tools
- 3
- Licences
- 2
- Most GitHub stars
- 3,486
- Self-host stated
- 2
Data checked Oct 14, 2026 against the vendors' own pages. How we verify
We found 3 open-source tools that share a category with Contant. Each licence is GitHub's own value for the repository, and each tool's website says the product is open source.
Licences: AGPL-3.0 (2) and Apache-2.0 (1). GPL-family licences require you to publish the source of modified versions you distribute (AGPL also when you run them as a network service); permissive licences such as MIT and Apache-2.0 do not.
espocrm has the most GitHub stars here (3,486, checked Oct 14, 2026). Stars measure attention on GitHub, not quality.
1 of them is ranked on the social media scheduling tools scorecard. Order: tools in Contant's own market come first, then the rest, ranked tools by rank, then by GitHub stars.
2 tools state a self-hosting option on their own site; for the others we found no statement either way.
Open source Contant alternatives compared
| # | Tool | Licence | GitHub stars | Repository | Self-host | Paid from, monthly | Free plan | Score | Data checked |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  brightbean-studio | AGPL-3.0 | 2,466 | brightbeanxyz/brightbean-studio | Yes | $119/mo | Yes, unlimited workspaces | 58/100 | Oct 14, 2026 |
| 2 |  espocrm | AGPL-3.0 | 3,486 | espocrm/espocrm | – | $15/user/mo | No | Not ranked | Oct 14, 2026 |
| 3 |  warmbly | Apache-2.0 | 431 | warmbly/warmbly | Yes | Not offered | Yes | Not ranked | Oct 14, 2026 |
Each value links the page it was read from (hover for the check date).
– = not published by the vendor, or not verified yet.
How each one differs from Contant
- brightbean-studio · AGPL-3.0
Social media scheduling and management tool, free to use hosted or self-hosted, with calendar, approvals, inbox, analytics and an agent API.
- Licence: AGPL-3.0 (GitHub, checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- GitHub stars: 2,466 (checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- Vendor says: "Scoring and research API for AI agents BrightBean Studio Open-source social media scheduling Pricing Blog Log in Sign up Menu Features Products +" source
- Self-host: stated on the vendor's site source
- Hosted or paid plan: $119 billed monthly (Plan), $100 more than Contant's $19 source
- Score: 58/100, #82 of 117
- Verified features: Calendar view, Direct auto-publishing, Post and account analytics, Approval workflows, Unified social inbox and 1 more
8 of 24 tracked details verified
Homepage captured Oct 14, 2026 - espocrm · AGPL-3.0
Open-source CRM web application for managing accounts, contacts, leads, opportunities, tasks and sales documents, with cloud and self-hosted options.
- Licence: AGPL-3.0 (GitHub, checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- GitHub stars: 3,486 (checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- Vendor says: "through building customer loyalty by using our open source sales tool. © 2026 EspoCRM. All Rights Reserved." source
- Hosted or paid plan: $15 per user billed monthly (Basic), $4 less than Contant's $19 (different pricing units: compare plan limits) source
- Verified features: Post and account analytics, Public API
4 of 24 tracked details verified
- warmbly · Apache-2.0
Open-source cold email platform that warms up mailboxes, sends campaign sequences and gathers replies in one inbox, with a built-in CRM.
- Licence: Apache-2.0 (GitHub, checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- GitHub stars: 431 (checked Oct 14, 2026) source
- Vendor says: "Star on GitHub· 430 Join the Discord Log in Start free Open source Self-host the whole platform · Apache 2.0 Apache 2.0 The largest open-source" source
- Self-host: stated on the vendor's site source
- Hosted or paid plan: $23 per month billed annually; not compared with Contant, which publishes no price on the same billing basis source
- Verified features: Post and account analytics, Public API
3 of 24 tracked details verified
How we picked
- Open source only: the licence is GitHub's SPDX value for the tool's repository (NOASSERTION or no licence is left out), and the tool's own website or our grounded summary says the product is open source. A company that merely publishes a repository is not counted.
- Same category or overlapping use: the tool lists at least one category the tool on this page lists; tools in its own market come first.
- Order: tools ranked on the category scorecard by rank (at least 60% of the weight with verified data), then by GitHub stars, then name. Stars are as of the date shown.
- Self-hosting is shown only when the vendor's site states it. A feature counts as missing only when the vendor's page states it; a feature the vendor does not mention is not listed either way.
- This page is built only when at least 3 tools qualify.
Every value is read from the vendor's own pages (or GitHub for licences and stars) and shown with the date we checked it. A value we could not verify is shown as a dash, never estimated, and never read as a “no”. We did not test these tools hands-on unless a listing says so. Methodology
The scorecard behind the ranks
Every one of these social media scheduling tools is scored by the same 8 criteria (scorecard v2). Each criterion gives 0 to 100 from the vendor's published data; the total is the weighted average. A criterion without verified data is left out and the other weights are re-normalised. A tool with under 60% of the weight covered is listed as not ranked, and so is a tool with no verified price and fewer than 2 verified features (“needs a verified price”); each score shows how many criteria it is based on. The core criteria are the same in every category; the category criteria are specific to social media scheduling tools. Nobody gets custom weights, including our own products.
| Criterion | Weight | Type | What we measure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entry price | 25% | Core | Price per month of the cheapest paid plan, against the prices of other social media scheduling tools on the same billing basis (monthly-billed prices against monthly, annual-billed against annual).Log scale. Billed monthly: $9/month or less = 100, $49 or more = 0. Only billed annually: $9/month or less = 100, $58 or more = 0. Only free plans = 100. Usage-priced and one-time plans are not scored. |
| Free plan or trial | 15% | Core | Whether you can use the tool before paying: a free plan, or failing that a free trial, as shown on the vendor's pricing page.Free plan = 100. No free plan but a free trial = 60. The pricing page lists plans but shows neither = 0. No plans read = not scored. |
| Pricing transparency | 10% | Core | How much of the pricing is public: the share of plans with a published price ("contact sales" counts against), and whether there are at least 3 published tiers.80 x (plans with a public price / plans listed) + 20 x (public plans, up to 3) / 3. No plans read = not scored. |
| Verified features | 15% | Core | How many of the 19 features we track for this category the vendor's own pages verifiably show (posting queue, bulk scheduling (csv or multi-post), calendar view, first-comment scheduling, direct auto-publishing, recurring posts, media library, ai caption assistant, post and account analytics, report exports (pdf/csv), best-time-to-post suggestions, approval workflows, user roles and permissions, separate client workspaces, unified social inbox, white-label reports, link tracking (utm / short links), content repurposing, ugc collection). This counts verified features only: a tool that documents less scores lower here, and only here.Linear: verified features / 10 (half the tracked list) x 100, capped at 100. No tracked feature verified = not scored. |
| API, integrations and export | 10% | Core | Whether a public API exists, how many integrations the vendor states, and whether the vendor documents a way to export your data.Average of the parts with data: public API yes = 100, no = 0; integrations on a log scale (100 or more = 100); a documented data export = 100. None verified = not scored. |
| Platform coverage | 10% | Category | How many of the 15 social platforms we track the vendor says the tool supports.Linear: platforms / 10 x 100, capped at 100. No verified platform list = not scored. |
| Cost per connected account | 10% | Category | Monthly price per connected account on the cheapest paid plan that allows at least 3 social accounts.Log scale: $2 per account or less = 100, $40 or more = 0. Plans that do not state an account limit are not used. |
| Free plan limits | 5% | Category | What the free plan allows: connected accounts (full marks at 3), scheduled posts per month (full marks at 100).Each stated limit linear up to its full mark (unlimited = 100), averaged. Tools without a free plan, or whose free plan states none of these limits, are not scored here. |
Sources are vendor pricing pages, docs and changelogs, each with the date we checked it. We did not test these tools hands-on unless a listing says so. Full formulas: methodology.
Questions, answered from the data
Is there an open source alternative to Contant?
Yes: 3 open-source tools share a category with Contant, led by brightbean-studio, espocrm and warmbly.
Which open source Contant alternative is most popular on GitHub?
espocrm, with 3,486 GitHub stars (checked Oct 14, 2026).
Which licences do these alternatives use?
AGPL-3.0: 2 and Apache-2.0: 1, as GitHub reports them for each repository.
Which ones can I self-host?
brightbean-studio and warmbly state a self-hosting option on their own site.