These two end up on the same shortlist because they are the only tools in the category with a free plan you can run a business on indefinitely. They are not, however, the same product.
One is a reporting tool that also schedules. The other is a scheduler that deliberately stops before reporting. The choice is usually settled by whether anyone outside your business ever reads the numbers.
Choose Metricool if you post for clients, count brands, and have to hand someone a report at the end of the month. Choose Buffer if you post for yourself, count channels, and want the bill to fall when one goes away. At one brand and three channels the free plans are close enough that the tiebreaker is LinkedIn — Metricool's free tier cannot connect it.
The free plans are not equivalent
Both are permanent, and the similarity ends there. Metricool's free plan runs one brand with 20 scheduled posts a month and blocks LinkedIn and X entirely, which for a B2B consultant is the whole product missing. Buffer's takes three channels with ten scheduled posts each, refillable, and excludes no network by name. If you intend to stay free, Buffer covers more of a normal week; if you intend to stay free and post to LinkedIn, this is not a comparison at all.
Brands against channels, and the invoice that follows
Metricool's paid tiers count brands: up to five on the entry plan, up to ten one step above. Buffer's count channels, billed one at a time. A consultant running a single brand across five networks pays one Metricool tier or five Buffer channels, and Buffer wins. An agency running five clients across four networks each pays the same single Metricool tier or twenty Buffer channels, and it is not close. The crossover sits roughly where your channel count passes four per brand — run that arithmetic with your real numbers before trialling either.
Reporting is the actual difference
Metricool includes client-ready PDF and PPT reports from its entry paid plan, alongside competitor tracking and analytics with unlimited history. Buffer's analytics answer how a given post did and stop there on purpose. If your social work ends when the post publishes, Buffer's restraint is a feature and you should not pay for the rest. If it ends when a client reads a monthly summary, you will rebuild that summary by hand every month in Buffer — the cost that appears on neither pricing page.
Where each one runs out
Buffer runs out at collaboration: its entry paid plan is single-user, and channels multiply quickly once clients arrive. Metricool runs out at approvals — it will schedule and report across many brands, but it is not built around a client signing off on a post before it goes live. If either of those is where your time actually goes, neither tool is the answer, and the comparison worth reading instead is Later against Hootsuite.
Pricing side by side
Frequently asked questions
Which free plan is more generous?
Buffer's, for most people: three channels and ten scheduled posts each, against Metricool's single brand and 20 posts a month. Metricool's free tier also excludes LinkedIn and X connections, which settles it outright for anyone whose audience is on LinkedIn.
I have five clients. Which is cheaper?
Metricool, clearly. It charges per brand, so five clients sit inside one tier where Buffer would bill every channel of every client separately. The advantage reverses for a single business posting to only two or three networks.
Does either handle client approvals?
Not in the way an agency means it. Both let a team collaborate on drafts at their higher tiers, and neither is built around a formal client sign-off step before publishing. That is Later's territory rather than theirs.
Can I move from one to the other later?
Yes, and the cost is your queue rather than your history: scheduled posts do not transfer, and analytics export is limited on both. Move at a natural break in the calendar rather than mid-campaign.