Typeform
Windmill
| Feature | Typeform | Windmill |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free / from $25/mo | Free / from $10/mo |
| Free Plan | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Rating | 4.4 / 5 | 4.4 / 5 |
| Best For | marketers, researchers, agencies, lead-generation | developers, devops-teams, internal-tools, data-pipelines |
| Founded | 2012 | 2022 |
| Conversational Forms | ✓ | ✗ |
| Logic Branching | ✓ | ✗ |
| Integrations | ✓ | ✗ |
| Payments | ✓ | ✗ |
| Video Interactions | ✓ | ✗ |
| Analytics | ✓ | ✗ |
| Custom Branding | ✓ | ✗ |
| Workflow Editor | ✗ | ✓ |
| Script To Ui | ✗ | ✓ |
| Scheduling | ✗ | ✓ |
| Approval Flows | ✗ | ✓ |
| Multi Language | ✗ | ✓ |
| Self Hostable | ✗ | ✓ |
| Audit Logs | ✗ | ✓ |
✓ Typeform Pros
- Beautiful one-question-at-a-time interface
- Higher completion rates than traditional forms
- Advanced logic branching and personalization
- Excellent brand customization options
✗ Typeform Cons
- Expensive for the number of responses included
- Free plan limited to 10 responses per month
- Can feel slow for simple data collection
✓ Windmill Pros
- Open-source and self-hostable
- Supports Python, TypeScript, Go, Bash, SQL natively
- Auto-generates UI from script parameters
- Excellent scheduling and workflow orchestration
✗ Windmill Cons
- Smaller community than Zapier/n8n
- Self-hosting requires infrastructure knowledge
- Less polished documentation for beginners
The Verdict
Typeform is built for marketers and researchers, with a focus on conversational-forms and logic-branching. Windmill targets developers and devops teams and leads with workflow-editor and script-to-ui.
On pricing, Windmill is the clear winner for budget-conscious users — starting at $10/mo compared to $25/mo for Typeform. That $15/mo difference adds up quickly for growing teams.
Both offer free plans, so you can test each with your real workflow before committing to a subscription.
This is a genuinely close comparison. If you can, sign up for both free trials (where available) and run a one-week test with your actual team tasks before deciding.