Table of Contents
In this article I’m comparing Advanced Custom Fields and Meta Box. Which one should you use? That’s a common question and my goal in this video is to help you answer it. In order to provide you that information, there are going to be three areas of comparison. First, we’ll look at market share and third party support. Second, we’ll look at the product design philosophy and do feature comparisons. And third, we’ll look at pricing and other considerations. After going through those comparison points, I’ll have a frank discussion with you on how you should decide which one you should use.
Video Version
Market Share and Third Party Support
So let’s get started by looking at market share and third party support. This is the free version of Advanced Custom Fields in the WordPress plugin directory. You’ll see that it has more than 2 million active installs. Now, unlike some plugins, when you install the pro version of ACF, you uninstall the free version, you don’t need both active. So we know that there are many more than 2 million installations of ACF after you add together the number of sites that are using the pro version.
Now, this is the core plugin for Meta Box on the WordPress plugin directory. We see that it has more than 700,000 active installs. Meta Box is number two in terms of the number of active installs. Unlike ACF, this is a framework or core plugin. And when you add pro extensions to Meta Box, you keep the core plugin installed. Because of that, we know that for Meta Box, there are 700,000 plus active installs in total, because this core plugin is required even when using pro. So in terms of active installs, ACF probably has something like four times more active installs than Meta Box. And we’ll see that that plays a huge role in terms of third party support.
Because there are so many more sites, so many more people using Advanced Custom Fields, when a plugin developer decides they want to support custom fields, ACF is the default. And in every instance, the plugin developer adds support for ACF first. So you think of all the page builders, Elementor, Beaver Builder, Bricks, Breakdance, and so on. The developers of those builders have added ACF support themselves. Because ACF is the default, many more 3rd party plugins support ACF and there are tons of training resources online. The ACF team doesn’t create a lot of training videos themselves.
Now, when we go to Meta Box, Meta Box has extensions. If you want a feature then you add an extension for it. So if we go and look at the list of extensions, we’ll see here is the Divi integration. Here is Elementor integration. And here is Beaver-Themer integration. Because they’re number two, the Meta Box team has had to do a little more work and supply integrations when they weren’t added by the plugin developers. And we see on the Meta Box website that the team is regularly creating their own training content.
Development Philosophy and Feature Comparison
And now we’re looking here at the extensions for Meta Box. And this gives us a little bit of insight into the development philosophy of Meta Box. Meta Box is made to be very modular. Okay, we have this core plugin. It contains all of the field types that Meta Box supports, but it has no UI. Originally Meta Box was developed as a developer-first tool. So everything was modular to keep it mean and lean.
ACF, on the other hand, its philosophy from the beginning was just to try to do one thing and do it very well. ACF didn’t worry about things like adding third-party support. ACF is just one plugin. There are addons for ACF, but they are created by third party developers.
So let’s go to a website where I have ACF installed. Okay, we have ACF Pro. We have the field groups where you define custom fields. We have the post types where you create custom post types. We have taxonomies where you create custom taxonomies. And a menu item where you can create an options page. Okay, so all of the features of ACF Pro are in this one plugin.
If we go to a site that has Meta Box installed, let’s look at the plugins. First, you’ll see this is the framework here. And then I’ve installed the Meta Box All-in-One plugin. And if we go to the Meta Box admin menus, we see there’s a dashboard, there is a menu item for creating post types, custom taxonomies, custom fields, relationships, and settings pages. So these are like the nuts and bolts, they are the same type of features as on ACF.
Then we have a menu item for Views, extensions, templates, and user profile. And if we look at extensions here, this is not a sales page listing their extensions. It is what you get with the Meta Box All-in-One plugin installed, which is a premium plugin, it gives the option from one UI to turn on or off any of the Meta Box extensions. This Meta Box All-in-One plugin exists because users had some fatigue installing feature extension after feature extension after feature extension. If you needed several of them, then you ended up with a lot of plugins installed. So they added the All-in-One plugin in response to user feedback. They wanted to make Meta Box easier.
There are both free and premium extensions for Meta Box, it does have some free extensions. So you have this framework base that is free. And then, for example, you have free extensions for creating custom post types and custom taxonomies and for making relationships between post types and users. But one extension that isn’t free, one user interface that isn’t available for free, is the ability to define custom fields. And they have their solution for that on the Meta Box website. They have an online generator for generating the code for your custom fields or the code for your Custom Post Types or the code for your taxonomies. So you generate the code, you put them into your custom plug-in or your child themes functions PHP file. Again, this shows the history or legacy of Meta Box being geared towards developers. As a consequence, though, Meta Box can potentially be more mean and lean than ACF.
Very quickly, I just want to look at the UIs here. If you look at ACF, the UI is very well laid out and attractive. If you look at the Meta Box UI, it is certainly functional, but it’s maybe not as smooth and it’s maybe not as polished as the ACF version. I think that’s one reason that people like ACF is that the UI is a bit more polished, but in terms of the nuts and bolts of custom post types, which is creating custom post types, creating custom taxonomies, creating custom fields, creating relationships between post types, and creating options or setting pages, the two products both have you covered, have all the bases covered.
Now where things start getting interesting is let’s compare custom fields. If we look at the ACF list of custom field types, we see that there are 30 different custom field types in total between free and pro. If we go to Pro, one of the ways that they separate the free from Pro is their advanced field types in the Pro version. You have the ability to create ACF blocks, the repeater field, the flexible content field, creating options pages, that is a Pro feature, the gallery field, the clone field, those are ACF Pro only.
For Meta Box, here is the list of all of the field types. There are 51 field, which is about 21 more than ACF, however some of these are a field types that is kind of divided up into several. For example, here’s image: advanced image, single image.
Now, let’s look at some extensions or features of Meta Box, which ACF does not have.
- Meta Box Views. Meta Box Views is a superpower. It provides an interface with the ability to create your own front-end templates using Meta Box and dynamic data. It is a code-based builder inside of your admin UI. It is 100% code-based, but they have a lot of helpers. Meta Box Views has saved my bacon when I’ve been in situations where the plugins I was using on a site did not support a particular feature. I was able to use Meta Box views to add support for those– to add support for those features. I was able to use Meta Box views in those cases. You might think of it a little bit like the live Canvas page builder, only easier. So if you’re a power user or a developer, if you’re not afraid of code, then Meta Box Views opens a lot of doors.
- If we keep looking, there is the ability here to create user profiles.
- Here is the ability to create custom tables. Sometimes when you get a large number of records and you’re using a lot of custom fields, performance can begin to degrade. And one solution for that is to put your custom fields into a custom table, because then the SQL queries will be a little bit faster than when retrieving the custom fields through the regular post meta. And that’s a part of Meta Box Pro. For ACF, the custom table feature is a separate third party solution, but it is bundled in with Meta Box, which is very nice.
- You also have the feature to create front end submissions for your Custom Post Types. There are several plug-ins for ACF for creating front end submissions, but again, this is a feature that Meta Box has bundled in.
- You have the Meta Box admin columns extension, which is to display your custom fields in the admin post listings.
All right, so I just wanted to point out that there are some powerful features in the Meta Box bundle which ACF doesn’t have. And again, this harkens back to the design philosophies of the two different plug-ins. For ACF, they really wanted to focus on doing one thing well. For Meta Box, they’re really trying to serve developers, so they have things like front end submission forms or ability to create custom tables bundled in.
Pricing and Other Considerations
Finally, let’s go and talk about pricing and other considerations. OK, one consideration is company stability. ACF started out as one person plug-in. The developer was great. He sold that plug-in once. And there was a lot of turmoil because ACF used to have a lifetime option, a lifetime bundle, a lifetime package. And the new purchaser was worried about supporting users with a lifetime license where they weren’t going to be getting any income from that. So that caused a little bit of an uproar. But then ACF was sold to WP Engine. And since it was sold to WP Engine, I think it’s had a real turnaround. And it’s really been realizing more of its potential. They have the new development team has regular releases where they’re adding quality of life features as well as product enhancements. So every year, you’re getting several releases that are really improving the product. Now, Meta Box has been around for a long time. It’s a very stable team. And just guessing, I would guess it has about the same number of employees, same number of people working on Meta Box as on ACF. So in terms of that, the teams are comparable. So in terms of that, the teams are comparable, although ACF does have a large hosting company behind it. I don’t think, though, that Meta Box is in any danger of closing down or going away. I think in that regards, it’s a very stable product.
Now, one difference, though, is that the ACF, I think, does have some community engagement by having regular live streams and webinars on their YouTube channel. And they also have some presence on Twitter or X. Meta Box, however, is producing lots. And the way Meta Box is interacting with the community is a little bit different than ACF. They do have a presence on Twitter. But they also create a lot of videos themselves showing how to use the features of Meta Box with different page builders so as to achieve different types of sites and so as to achieve different types of solutions and different types of sites. ACF does have a few training videos, but nowhere near as much training content as Meta Box. And in that regards, in relation to the community, Meta Box has an active Facebook group. They interact with the community regularly. It’s easy to ask the Meta Box team a question. And a lot of the features, a lot of the changes that have come to Meta Box have been through community feedback. So I think Meta Box– so both teams are responsive to the community. But I think the Meta Box team is a little bit more accessible. However, I think the Meta Box team is a little bit more accessible.
However, as I was mentioning, the ACF is hitting it off great in terms of regular periodic releases. I think the releases of Meta Box seems a little bit more ad hoc. I don’t see regular periodic releases. Rather occasionally, you’ll get a release like, for example, new features or upgrades to the Blocks extension. So from that point of view, I think today and in the recent history, and over the last year or two, ACF has been having more frequent– has been having regular updates. I think ACF has been having regular updates. So in terms of that, I think the ACF update schedule has been a little bit more consistent.
OK, now let’s look at pricing. In terms of pricing, ACF has $49 a year for one website. 10 sites is $149 a year. And unlimited websites is $249 a year. If we look at Meta Box pricing, they have one site for $49 a year. So that’s the same. Three sites for $99 a year. They have one site for $49, but it doesn’t have all extensions. They have three sites for $99, but it does include all extensions. And then they have a lifetime bundle for three sites for $299. I do have a coupon for Meta Box, a 20% off coupon. So that $299 actually comes down to $229 if you use a coupon for lifetime for three sites. If we look at the larger Meta Box plan for unlimited sites, $149 for 12 extensions. For unlimited sites, 12 extensions. $229 for unlimited sites, all extensions. So ACF was $249 for unlimited sites. And then $699 for a lifetime, which is unlimited sites and all extensions. And again, then if you use that 20% off coupon, that goes from $699 to $559.20. So that’s just a little bit over two years. A little bit over two years, the value, the cost. So it’s a little bit over– so $559.20 is a little bit over two years of the annual cost of ACF. So in terms of pricing, Meta Box is a little bit more attractive.
Discussion and Conclusions
OK, we’ve gone through a number of comparison points, so now lets have some discussion.
Marketshare and Third Party Support
When we looked at marketshare and 3rd party support we found that Advanced Custom Fields has approximately 4 times the number of active installs. We noted that the base functionality, ACF has an easy to use free version all packaged up in a single plugin while the free version of Meta Box is spread across multiple plugins and also with the free version of Meta Box, to create custom fields you need to use an online code generator. I think this difference helps to explains why ACF is vastly more popular.
ACF is supported by virtually all 3rd party themes and plugins that support custom fields. Further, there are a large number of free training resources available online for ACF. Meta Box, on the other hand, has added support for popular builders themselves, and they regularly release tutorials on their website and YouTube channel.
Philosophy and Comparing Features
Looking at the development philosophies and features, ACF was careful to limit features to core functionality and provide an easy to use and attractive user interface. Note however that ACF has been sold a couple of times, and the new owners have introduced ads onto the admin screens. Meta Box began with a developer focus so it has a module approach where you just add the features you use one at a time. Meta Box has all of the features of ACF but also additional functionality. Some of these features target common use cases, such as front-end forms, while others like Meta Box Views and Custom Tables are more for more advanced usage.
Pricing and Other Considerations
Over the past couple of years ACF has had regularly spaced feature updates that provide quality of life improvements and core features. Meta Box functionality is split across a number of separate extensions which make it seem as if updates are more ad hoc. Both products are kept up to date and get regular enhancements.
Advanced Custom Fields offers only annual packages and there haven’t been any sales. Meta Box seems to price its packages slightly below ACF and Meta Box has more flexible pricing. Meta Box also offers lifetime packages and there are occasional sales. Consequently, Meta Box pricing is more attractive.
Conclusions
Both ACF and Meta Box cover the same basic features for creating Custom Post Types, custom fields, and taxonomies. You can get the basics done with either one. Site builders using ACF may have a smoother, more streamlined experience. Also, if you are not sure what other tools you are going to use then note that ACF has the broadest support across 3rd party plugins. Using Meta Box may require a few more clicks and the user interface is not as polished, however, Meta Box provides additional functionality over ACF and works well with supported products. Meta Box is also more cost effective.
Wrap Up
So that is the comparison of Advanced Custom Fields and Meta Box. Did I miss something important? Do you have some insights you’d like to share? If so, please leave a comment below. I hope you found this discussion interesting and useful.
You can get 20% off Meta Box by using coupon: DYNAMIC20
