Key takeaways

• If you want a modern web app with portals, permissions, and automation, start with Tadabase, especially if you need to invite lots of users without seat costs.

• If you want to keep FileMaker but need browser access, FileMaker WebDirect is the usual path (host on FileMaker Server or FileMaker Cloud and publish the file for WebDirect access).

• If your main pain is pricing and scaling users, note that FileMaker Cloud is positioned as a per-user subscription billed annually.

Introduction

FileMaker earned its reputation the honest way: people used it to build real systems that ran real businesses. Quoting, inventory, job tracking, CRM, approvals, internal dashboards, even lightweight ERPs.

What changed is not the need for those workflows. What changed is access.

A FileMaker solution often starts as “the database we use,” then quietly becomes “the system everyone depends on.” Once that happens, the requests start piling up:

• “Can customers log in?”

• “Can vendors upload documents?”

• “Can field staff use it on their phone without weird workarounds?”

• “Can we add 50 more users without doing a pricing math problem?”

• “Can we make permissions obvious and safe?”

At that point, you are not really choosing a database tool anymore. You are choosing the platform your operations live on.

This guide helps you pick the right replacement category first, then the right product, based on how you actually use FileMaker.

Which name is correct

People use four phrases interchangeably. Here is the clean way to think about it.

• Claris is the company (Apple-owned subsidiary).

• Claris FileMaker is the platform family (the ecosystem).

• Claris FileMaker Pro is the desktop app used to build and run solutions locally.

• FileMaker Pro is the common shorthand people say in conversation.

If someone says “FileMaker,” they usually mean the whole platform, not just the desktop app.

What FileMaker WebDirect actually is

If you are evaluating “FileMaker on the web,” this matters.

FileMaker WebDirect is a FileMaker client in a web browser. It lets web users interact with your hosted FileMaker custom app. You still build the custom app in FileMaker Pro, then host it on FileMaker Server or FileMaker Cloud.

Publishing is typically: open the custom app in FileMaker Pro, configure it for WebDirect sharing, choose which users (privilege sets) can access it, then share the WebDirect URL from the host.

That is not “web-native” in the modern SaaS sense, but it can be the right choice if you are committed to FileMaker and mainly need browser access.

When staying on FileMaker still makes sense

FileMaker is still a rational choice when most of these are true:

• Your system is mostly internal and user count is stable

• The solution already works and the rebuild cost is hard to justify

• You have FileMaker expertise in-house or a trusted partner

• You do not need a polished portal experience for outside users

If you are in this camp, your best “alternative” might be an upgrade path plus tightening permissions, simplifying layouts, and documenting how the system works.

When an alternative is usually the better move

Switching platforms is usually the better move when the system is turning into a true multi-role web app:

• You need customer, vendor, or partner portals

• You want clean role-based pages, not “layouts with conditional logic everywhere”

• You want sharing that scales without licensing drama

• You want modern UX patterns (navigation, responsive pages, mobile-first behavior)

• You want automations and integrations without stacking add-ons

Pick the right category first

Most “FileMaker alternatives” fall into four buckets. The right bucket depends on what the app is becoming.

Web app platforms

Best when FileMaker is becoming a real web product for many roles, including external users.

Internal tool builders

Best when you already have a database and need fast admin screens for employees.

Spreadsheet-database hybrids

Best when the workflow is lightweight and the “app” is mostly tracking and collaboration.

Full custom build

Best when the system is core infrastructure, product-grade, and you have engineering budget.

The best FileMaker alternatives

1 Tadabase

Best overall replacement when you want a true web app with portals and permissions.

Tadabase fits the common FileMaker “next chapter”: role-based portals, external logins, automations, approvals, and a modern web UX.

The big economic difference for FileMaker switchers is that Tadabase explicitly positions pricing as no per-user fees and unlimited users.
That matters the moment your “app” needs 50 vendors, 200 customers, or a rotating cast of contractors.

Pick Tadabase if you need:

• Client, vendor, or staff portals

• Multiple permission levels and role-based navigation

• Automations and integrations

• A modern web app feel, not a database file metaphor

Skip Tadabase if:

• You must self-host everything

• Your goal is only an internal admin UI on top of an existing database

2 Airtable

Best for fast prototyping and lightweight workflows.

Airtable is excellent when the “app” is really a flexible tracker with some views, forms, and light automation. It becomes harder when you need deep permissions, complex workflows, or highly tailored portals.

Pick Airtable if:

• You want speed and flexibility

• Your data model is not deeply relational

• You can live with limitations around portal depth and complex logic

3 Caspio

Best for database-driven web apps with a long track record.

Caspio is often considered when you want a database-first approach to building web apps, forms, and role-based access.

Pick Caspio if:

• You want a web app platform that feels more database-centric

• You need forms, reports, authentication, and role-based access

4 Knack

Best for straightforward portals and CRUD apps.

Knack tends to be chosen for simpler portal-style apps: “users log in, see their records, submit forms, view reports.”

Pick Knack if:

• Your use case is portal plus basic workflows

• You want a simpler learning curve

5 Zoho Creator

Best if you are already a Zoho shop.

Zoho Creator can be a strong choice when your org already runs Zoho CRM, Zoho Books, Zoho Desk, and you want your internal apps inside that ecosystem.

Pick Zoho Creator if:

• Identity and workflows are already in Zoho

• You want broad business tooling in one place

6 Microsoft Power Apps

Best for Microsoft-first teams.

If your organization already lives in Microsoft 365, Azure AD, SharePoint, Teams, and Dataverse, Power Apps can be the most natural internal build platform.

Pick Power Apps if:

• Microsoft identity and governance are non-negotiable

• You are building mostly internal apps tied to Microsoft systems

7 Retool

Best for internal tools on top of an existing database.

Retool is great when you already have Postgres/MySQL and APIs, and you want to build fast admin panels, dashboards, and operational tools.

Pick Retool if:

• This is primarily for employees

• You want speed building internal UIs on top of existing data

Watch out if:

• You need lots of external users or client portals (economics and UX often change)

8 Appsmith

Best for Retool-style builds with open-source flexibility.

Appsmith is similar in spirit: a UI builder for internal apps that can connect to many data sources, with self-hosting options.

Pick Appsmith if:

• You want more control over deployment

• Your team can handle maintenance

9 Budibase

Best for self-hosted internal tools and lightweight apps.

Budibase is often evaluated when self-hosting matters and you want a builder that connects to existing data sources.

Pick Budibase if:

• Self-hosting is important

• You want internal tools plus basic workflows

10 Five

Best for developers who want SQL-first structure without building a full front end.

Five is typically considered by builders who want a more traditional database mindset (SQL, schema, structured development) with a faster path to a usable app.

Pick Five if:

• You care about SQL and structured backend logic

• You want to avoid building a full custom UI from scratch

11 Bubble with a real backend

Best for product-like UX and custom workflows.

Bubble is not a direct “FileMaker replacement,” but it is a legitimate option when you want something that feels like a custom software product.

Pick Bubble if:

• UX is a differentiator

• You are willing to design and build more

• You are comfortable pairing it with a serious backend approach

If you are choosing for a typical FileMaker use case

Here is the practical shortcut:

• You need portals + permissions + automation + lots of users
  Start with Tadabase.

• You want browser access but want to stay on FileMaker
  Look at WebDirect, hosted on Server or Cloud.

• You already have SQL and just want internal admin screens
  Look at Retool, Appsmith, Budibase.

• You want quick and flexible tracking
  Look at Airtable.

FileMaker Cloud pricing model

If pricing is part of why you are evaluating alternatives, note that Claris positions FileMaker Cloud as per user, per month, billed annually, with tiered user ranges.

A practical migration plan from FileMaker

Most failed migrations try to “recreate FileMaker layouts.” The better approach is workflow-first.

Step 1 List the workflows that matter

Write the 5 to 10 workflows people run weekly, for example:

• Create customer

• Log interaction

• Create order

• Approve request

• Generate report

• Notify owner and track status

Step 2 Export and clean the data

Expect to fix:

• Duplicates

• Overloaded text fields (that should become structured fields)

• Tables that grew without a clear model

Step 3 Build the minimum working system

Pick one workflow and rebuild it end-to-end with real users. Do not rebuild everything at once.

Step 4 Run parallel briefly

Keep FileMaker as the safety net for a short window, then cut over when the new system covers real usage.

Step 5 Lock down permissions early

Permissions are not a “later” task. They shape your data model and UI.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can FileMaker be used on the web

Yes. FileMaker WebDirect enables users to interact with your custom apps in a browser, and Claris documents how to publish and share WebDirect apps, including configuring WebDirect access and selecting users by privilege set.

What is the best FileMaker alternative

If your goal is a modern web app with portals, permissions, and automation, Tadabase is one of the most direct replacements, especially if you want to invite lots of users without per-user fees.

Why do teams leave FileMaker

Usually one of these:

• External user access becomes important (clients, vendors, partners)

• The system needs to feel web-native

• Permissions become harder to reason about safely

• Licensing and scaling costs become a constant constraint, especially in hosted models

Conclusion

FileMaker is still capable, but many teams outgrow it when the system needs to become a true web app used by multiple roles, including outside users.

If your next version needs portals, clean permissions, modern UX, and user scaling without seat-based pricing pressure, focus your evaluation on web app platforms and start with Tadabase.