Blue as an Asana Alternative

Introduction to Asana

Asana, like Trello and Basecamp, is one of the early birds in the project management space. Founded in 2008 by Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskowitz and former Facebook CTO (Chief Technology Officer and VP of Engineering) Justin Rosenstein.

Interestingly, Dustin was Mark Zuckerberg's roommate at Harvard and helped code the social network in its early days!

Justin Rosenstein worked as a lead programmer at Facebook, where he introduced the "Like" button. Prior to Facebook, he also worked at Google as a product manager, contributing to projects that later became Google Drive and the initial GChat prototype

Asana emerged from their frustration with the chaotic flow of tasks and communication that often hindered productivity in large organizations. Asana took approximately four years from its founding in 2008 to its commercial launch in 2012. The duo aimed to create a platform that would streamline workflows and reduce the time spent on administrative tasks, allowing teams to focus on their core work.

Fast forward 16 years, and Asana is a publicly listed company, trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Introduction to Blue

Blue was founded in 2018 by Emanuele "Manny" Faja with a clear mission:

To organize the world's work by building the best project management platform on the planet—simple, powerful, flexible, and affordable for all.

Blue is proudly bootstrapped.

We're in the minority in this industry, where most of the competition have raised hundreds of millions in venture capital funding. This approach has allowed Blue to stay true to its vision and maintain a strong focus on user needs and product quality, instead of having to juggle investor needs with customer needs.

Pricing Comparison

Let's start by reviewing the differences in pricing strategy between Asana and Blue.

Blue's pricing is very clear. There is one plan with two billing options:

• Monthly plan: $7/month/user.
• Yearly plan: $70/year/user (so you get two months free)

Not all user types in Blue count towards your subscription cost.

The table below gives an overview of the different roles:

Once you are a Blue customer, there are no upsells within the platform. So you will never see this while you are trying to do your work:

We have zero incentives to try and disturb you while you are working to try and get you to upgrade your account to a more expensive plan or to cross-sell you another product.

Asana Plan Breakdown

Asana has five plans:

While the free ("Personal") plan may appear tempting if you're a small team with less than ten users, you have to consider that it does come with various limitations.

It lacks advanced project management features such as Timeline view, Gantt charts, and task dependencies that are available in the paid plans. This makes it difficult to visualize project progress and manage complex interdependent tasks.

Another key limitation is the inability to create private projects and teams. All projects created in the free plan are visible to all team members, which may not be ideal if sensitive information needs to be shared.

The free plan also lacks advanced search capabilities and custom fields.

With regards to support, you can only rely on the Asana Community Forum, where you can ask questions, share experiences, and seek advice from other users. Additionally, Asana provides access to their Help Center, which includes articles and guides to help users navigate the platform and troubleshoot common issues.

You can see just how limited Asana's free plan is in the video below. Most tabs and features you click on are locked away:

With regards to paid plans, even Asana's cheapest paid plan ("Starter") is almost double the price of Blue, and comes with its own set of limitations. You only get 250 automations per month (Blue offers unlimited) and also only 150 actions of Asana Intelligence (again, Blue offers unlimited AI use).

You also cannot use any of the reporting capabiltiies, essentially leaving you blind to what's happening across your organization. You will need Asana's Advanced plan for that and many more features.

You can check our out project management software platform benchmarks to see precisely how Blue stacks up against all the various Asana plans.

Main Feature Comparison

Of course, pricing is not everything that matters.

You need a platform that you can easily onboard your team and clients so that they can get up and running.

And this is one of the main criticms of Asana — it is not that intutitive to use.

It feels like it has been designed by people who have never left Silicon Valley, let alone spoken to people who don't work in technology or software.

On the other hand, Blue was created specifically because the founder of Blue was sick and tired of continuously trying to onboard his clients to Asana!

The team at Asana have built a very successful and powerful project management system. However, they have focussed too much on the powerful aspect of things, that they have forgotten that people also need something that is easy-to-use. People are too busy to read complex manuals.

Interestingly, this is the opposite criticism that we have of Basecamp.

Views

Asana has plenty of views, as long as you are willing to pay the $30.49/month/user for their advanced plan.

Custom Fields

These are the custom fields comparison list. Custom fields are important because they allow you to structure data in your projects instead of having your data in messy comments or description fields.

Based on the comparison between Blue and Asana in terms of custom fields, it's clear that Blue offers a more comprehensive and versatile set of options for structured data management.

While both platforms provide basic field types such as single-line text, multiple-line text, date, number, and percent, Blue extends its capabilities with specialized fields like URL/Link, Country, Formula, File, Location/Map, Phone Number, Email, Star Rating, Unique ID, Reference, Lookup, and Duration.

These additional field types allow for more specific and varied data capture, enhancing the overall flexibility and utility of the platform. It is surprising that Asana does not have some basic fields such as email and phone numbers.

Blue's advanced custom fields enable better handling of formatted data, improved geospatial information management, and more complex data relationships. For instance, the Phone Number and Email fields suggest better formatting and validation, while the Country and Location/Map fields offer superior capabilities for managing geographical information. T

The Reference and Lookup fields allow for more intricate data connections, reducing redundancy and improving data integrity. Additionally, Blue's Unique ID field helps in creating distinct identifiers for each entry, which is crucial for data tracking and management.

This difference in custom field capabilities means that Blue is a better choice for those that require more nuanced daa capture and organization.

Multi-Homing

That said, Asana does have a powerful ace up its sleeve. Based on our benchmarks, not many project management systems have the ability to have a single task appear in multiple projects simultaneously. This functionality, often referred to as "multi-homing" or "cross-project tasks," enables teams to manage work more efficiently across different projects or departments without duplicating information. By allowing a task to exist in multiple projects, Asana ensures that team members can view and update the task from any relevant project context, maintaining a single source of truth for that piece of work.

This feature is particularly useful for tasks that span multiple teams or initiatives, such as cross-functional projects or tasks that contribute to various goals. For example, a marketing task could be relevant to both a product launch project and a general marketing campaign project. With multi-homing, team members can access and update the task from either project, and any changes made will be reflected across all instances of the task. This not only saves time by eliminating the need to manually update multiple copies of a task but also improves collaboration and visibility across teams

File Storage

When it comes to managing project files, Asana has several limitations that might hinder your workflow.

Each file uploaded to Asana is restricted to a maximum size of 100MB, which can be problematic for teams working with large documents, high-resolution images, or multimedia files.

Additionally, Asana lacks an integrated file-sharing feature within the platform, forcing users to rely on third-party services for sharing files externally. This reliance can disrupt workflow and add complexity.

Another significant drawback of Asana is the inability to organize files into folders within the platform.

Without a proper folder structure, managing and retrieving files becomes cumbersome, especially for larger projects with numerous documents. Users often have to rely on the search function, which is less efficient than a well-organized folder system. While Asana does integrate with popular cloud storage solutions like Google Drive and Dropbox, navigating between multiple platforms can fragment the user experience.

In contrast, Blue offers a more robust and user-friendly approach to file storage.

Blue allows files up to 5GB per file, accommodating larger documents and media files with ease.

It also features integrated file sharing within the platform, streamlining collaboration by allowing users to share files publicly without switching to third-party services. Blue supports a hierarchical folder system, enabling users to organize their files logically, which simplifies navigation and file retrieval, maintaining order and efficiency even in complex projects.

By providing comprehensive file management features within the platform, Blue ensures a smoother, more cohesive user experience, enhancing productivity and reducing friction. For teams that manage numerous or large files, Blue's approach offers clear advantages. The ability to handle larger files, organize them effectively, and share them seamlessly can significantly improve workflow efficiency.

In comparison, Asana's limitations might necessitate additional tools and workarounds, potentially leading to fragmented workflows and reduced productivity. For teams prioritizing a streamlined and integrated file management system, Blue stands out as a compelling alternative to Asana.

Dashboards

Both Asana and Blue have dashboards, but when you get into the details you come to realize that there are serious shortcomings to how Asana have implemented their dashboards.

One of the key things required to create accurate and impactful dashboards is the ability to filter down to precisely the data you need. Anything less, and then you're looking at exporting your data and using third party systems such as Metabase or PowerBI.

Asana dashboards have several limitations when it comes to filtering with custom fields.

Custom field filtering is available, but not all field types are equally supported.

Single-select custom fields can be used for filtering, while multi-select, text-based, and some numeric custom fields have limited or no filtering capabilities in dashboards.

Additionally, only organization-wide custom fields can be used for filtering in portfolio-level or global reporting, which can be problematic for projects using project-specific custom fields.

Furthermore, there are limitations in using "any" or "not" conditions with custom field filters in dashboards, unlike in search filters. This can make it difficult to create more complex or inclusive filters.

Users have also reported inconsistencies in the availability of certain custom fields as filter options, with some fields appearing as axes in charts but not as filters. These limitations can significantly impact the flexibility and depth of analysis possible through Asana dashboards.

Blue takes a completely different approach. We have advanced filters available on our project views. When creating dashboards, you can leverage the exact same filters.

APIs & Webhooks

API

Asana provides full API access with a rate limit of 1,500 requests per minute. This API allows you to access all endpoints, including the crucial "search" endpoint. However, there is a limitation of reading up to 50,000 items within a container such as tasks, stories, or projects. The API uses a RESTful interface, supports JSON or form-encoded content in requests, and returns JSON responses.

Asana offers client libraries for various programming languages like Node.js, Java, and PHP, enabling developers to read information, input data, and automate reactions to changes. For authentication, Asana uses OAuth 2.0 (Asana Connect) and also supports Personal Access Tokens for individual access and development. The API includes security measures like CORS headers, request signature verification, and expiration time checks.

However, there are some criticisms of Asana's API.

Certain features, like rules, are not currently accessible via the API. Additionally, some API limits are not well-documented, causing difficulties for developers. Accessing subtasks can be inefficient and may lead to rate limit issues since the API doesn't provide a direct way to determine if a task has subtasks without making additional requests.

Furthermore, the API lacks efficient ways to get information like "subtask_count" or "attachments_count" without additional requests.

For users on the free plan, the API is limited to 150 requests per minute and does not provide access to the "search tasks" endpoint. This can restrict the functionality available to users who do not subscribe to a paid plan.

The Blue GraphQL API has 100% coverage of all the features in Blue.

So anything that you can do via our interface, you can trigger programmatically. This was a conscious design choice when we first created our API, that we wanted to give developers full access to everything.

Every time we release a new feature the API is updated to support these new features.

Webhooks

Webhooks allow applications to be notified of changes in Asana in real-time. They work similarly to Asana's events resource but "push" events via HTTP POST to a specified URL instead of requiring polling.

Webhooks can be created at different levels: project, portfolio, team, or workspace. However, there are important scope limitations to consider. Task-level events, including subtasks and stories, do not propagate to higher-level webhooks like those at the workspace level. Workspace-level webhooks require at least one filter, and all filters must be in Asana's whitelist.

Asana webhooks perform regular health checks, known as "heartbeat events" or "health checks." There's no built-in notification system to alert users when a webhook becomes inactive due to failed health checks.

Asana webhooks offer granular configuration options, allowing you to tailor notifications to specific needs. You can create webhooks for individual projects, portfolios, teams, or workspaces, with project-level webhooks recommended for task-related events.

The system supports detailed event filtering through WebhookFilter objects. This enables you to specify which resource types (e.g., tasks, stories) and actions (added, changed, deleted) trigger notifications. For tasks, you can even filter on specific fields, such as due date changes.

Multiple filters can be combined in a single webhook configuration, acting as a whitelist where any matching event triggers the webhook. This flexibility allows for precise control over webhook notifications, from broad project-wide updates to specific task field changes.

Blue offers both programmatic access and a web interface to create, view, and manage Webhooks.

Blue's webhook options also provide a more granular approach, allowing users to select specific events to trigger notifications. This level of customization includes actions on records, checklists, custom fields, tags, and comments, among others. This granularity ensures that you can tailor webhooks to your exact needs, only triggering on the most relevant events.

Furthermore, Blue's webhooks can be filtered by one or more projects, even across different organizations or workspaces. This means you can create sophisticated, cross-project automation rules and notifications, enhancing coordination and productivity across various teams and departments. The ability to manage these settings through a user-friendly interface simplifies the process, making it accessible even to those without programming expertise.

User Interface & Experience

One of Blue's standout features is the ability to use multiple custom domains free of charge, included in the subscription. This means users can access Blue on their own domain or subdomain. This is particularly advantageous for agencies or professional services, as it allows them to showcase their brand rather than Blue's. In contrast, Asana lacks this feature, which means users are consistently exposed to Asana's branding. This can be a drawback for businesses that want to maintain a consistent and professional brand identity.

Layout and Usability

Asana's interface has been updated over the past 16 years, but it still retains some legacy design elements that make it feel less modern compared to Blue. One notable issue is how tasks only slide in from the right, which can feel cramped and inefficient, especially when managing multiple tasks simultaneously. This design choice often results in a less streamlined user experience.

Additionally, Asana lacks the ability to drag and drop to reorder projects in the sidebar, a basic UX feature that enhances usability and organization. This omission can be frustrating for users who need to quickly rearrange their projects.

Another significant limitation is that Asana allows only one person to be assigned to a task. While this may align with Asana's philosophical approach to task management, it restricts flexibility. Blue, on the other hand, allows multiple users to be assigned to a task.

Overall, Blue's user interface is designed with modernity and flexibility in mind, ensuring a more intuitive and user-friendly experience. Users appreciate the streamlined design and the ability to customize their workspace to better fit their branding and organizational needs. In contrast, Asana's interface, while functional, can feel outdated and less flexible due to its design choices and limitations.

In conclusion, while both platforms have their strengths, Blue's focus on a customizable, modern interface and enhanced usability features make it a compelling choice for teams seeking an efficient and brand-consistent project management tool.

Roadmaps

When evaluating project management tools, it's essential to consider how each platform plans its future developments and communicates these plans to its users.

Asana Roadmap

Asana does not have a public roadmap.

This lack of transparency can be a disadvantage for users who want to know what new features or improvements are on the horizon. Without a public roadmap, it is challenging to anticipate how the platform will evolve and whether it will continue to meet the needs of its users.

Blue Roadmap

In contrast, Blue maintains a clear published roadmap.

This transparency allows users to see exactly what features and enhancements are planned, and when they can expect them. A public roadmap helps build trust and keeps users informed about the platform's direction. It also provides an opportunity for users to give feedback and influence the development of new features.

Changelogs

Both Asana and Blue maintain changelogs.

Changelogs are essential for tracking updates, bug fixes, and new features. They help users stay informed about the latest changes and improvements in the platform. By regularly updating their changelogs, both platforms demonstrate a commitment to continuous improvement and transparency.

Differences in Corporate Structure

When you're choosing a project management tool, it’s important to look beyond just its features. The company behind the product matters too. Their corporate structure and focus could influence how the tool evolves and its long-term sustainability.

Let's start with Asana.

Asana is a public company, listed on the New York Stock Exchange. It has 1,840 employees spread across 13 in offices:

1. San Francisco, CA (Headquarters)
2. Chicago, IL
3. New York City, NY
4. Sydney, Australia
5. Vancouver, Canada
6. Paris, France
7. Munich, Germany
8. Reykjavik, Iceland
9. Dublin, Ireland
10. Tokyo, Japan
11. Warsaw, Poland
12. London, UK
13. Singapore

Because Asana is a publicly traded company, we can dig into its financials to see if its sustainable. This is important, becuase a company that is not sustainable can put your projects at risk, or at the very least they are likely to increase prices in the future to try and cover their loses.

Before going public, Asana raised $453M across 5 investment rounds.

Since its listing in the New York Stock Exchange, Asana has lost 89.29% of its value since November 2021 to the present day. It was trading at $142.68 and nowdays trades for around $15.

The main reason for Asana's significant stock price decline since its all-time high is the intense competition in the project management software market which offer similar or potentially better value propositions.

And the losses have added up! The total losses from 2020 to 2024 amount to $443.3 million. ​​

*Note: The 2024 figure is the GAAP operating loss, not the full net loss, and may not represent the entire fiscal year.

This is because Asana has had to spend huge amounts on sales and marketing (here's their annual report).

Just in 2023 alone, they spent $434.9M on sales and marketing.

😳

This investment resulted in a revenue growth of $169 million.

To measure the effectiveness of this spending, we can calculate the Revenue Efficiency Ratio:

Revenue Growth / Sales & Marketing Spend

Crunching the numbers, for every $1 spent on sales and marketing, Asana generated only $0.39 in new revenue.

These ratios suggest that Asana's sales and marketing expenditure in 2023 was not highly efficient in terms of generating new revenue. Typically, a ratio above 1 is considered good, indicating that the company is generating more new revenue than it is spending on sales and marketing.

Obviously with B2B SaaS (Software as a Service) things are a little more complex that this, but this is a good rule of thumb.

So the core question to ask yourself:

Is Asana is really a software company providing a project management platform, or a marketing company that happens to sell project management software?

This is important for potential customers to understand, because you want to know where your vendor's focus are.

Compared to their $434.3M spend on marketing in 2023, they spent $297M on product development — so we will let you make up your mind on this.

And if you're a small business, you should also consider how well does a company with 13 offices and 1,800+ staff really know about the problems that you are facing?

In reality, they don't know anything about running a sustainable business in the world outside of the venture capital Silicon-Valley bubble.

Let's take about Blue.

Blue is a SME serving SMEs.

We're not slaves to investors or quarterly reports, we only need to focus on keeping our customers happy and successful.

I think this single-minded dedication shows in the product. We've managed to build a product that is highly competitive to Asana, without burning through half a billion dollars in the process.

And so what does this mean for you? Well, it means better prices, and a platform that is designed to help you work and focus, not a platform who's main purpose is to constantly try and up sell you a more expensive plan.

An Asana Alternative?

After taking a closer look at Blue and Asana, it’s evident that Blue stands out as a great Asana alternative, especially for teams that want a cost-effective mix of simplicity and robust features.

Let's recap.

Blue is only $7/month compared to Asana's $30.49/month. For a team of 25 over the course of a year, the difference in cost becomes substantial. Let’s break down the calculations to understand the financial implications.

So with Blue, you can save $7,000+ a year for a team of 25. That's a lot of money back to your bottom line.

Blue allows you to upload files up to 5GB, while Asana only allows you 100MB per file. So if any of your workflows rely on uploading creative assets, videos, etc, then you will have to rely on another subscription for a storage account.

Blue has one of the most comprehensive custom field offerings on the market, allowing you to keep your data structured, regardless of the type of project and processes that you have. Asana lacks even basic fields such as phone number and email fields, which inevitably means data issues down the road.

Finally, Blue is a software company, Asana is a marketing company disguised as a software company.

In the end, for teams that want a flexible, feature-rich, and cost-effective solution without sacrificing ease of use, Blue is an excellent project management alternative to Asana.

Blue combines the power that made Asana popular with the simplicity and adaptability needed for today’s varied work environments.

As with any software decision, it’s a good idea for teams to take advantage of free trials (try Blue here!) and carefully assess both platforms against their specific needs before making a final choice.

Further Resources

Asana

• Asana Pricing Page
• Asana Documentation
• Asana G2 Reviews
• Asana Capterra Reviews

Blue

• Blue Pricing Page
• Blue Documentation
• Blue G2 Reviews
• Blue Capterra Reviews
• Blue Community