zipBoard is a browser-based visual review tool. Drawings, documents and other files go up as what it now calls Digital Asset Pieces, reviewers mark them up and comment in threads, and any comment can become a task with an assignee, a due date, a priority and a status. Its guest model is unusually open: reviewers do not need accounts at all, because a link is enough.
Xenmark runs one job end to end: a drawing set goes out for review, comments come back against the revision they were raised on, and the review finishes as two documents — a plan showing where each comment sits, and a spreadsheet saying what each one means, numbered to match.
zipBoard is a broad visual review platform — web pages, video and design files go through the same workflow as drawings — and it is a trial of about two weeks, then $99 a month. Choose Xenmark when the work is drawing review and it has to be able to start for nothing: a free Xenmark project runs a complete review, exports included, with no card and no expiry. The narrower difference is the handover. Inside zipBoard a task is tied to its mark, and opening one highlights the exact annotation. A Xenmark comment carries one number all the way out — item 12 in the register is the mark labelled 12 on the drawing you send back.
zipBoard offers a trial of about two weeks and then starts at $99 a month; it publishes no permanent free plan. The Xenmark Free plan runs one active review from start to finish, exports included, with no card and no expiry. This is the difference you feel first, and it does not depend on reading any documentation.
zipBoard reviews web pages, video, design files and documents through the same workflow, with tasks, assignees and due dates around them. Xenmark takes PDF drawings and does one job with them. If your review is broader than drawings, that breadth is a reason to choose zipBoard; if it is only drawings, the narrower tool fits the work.
zipBoard links a task to its exact annotation while you are working in it. A Xenmark comment carries one number further still — into the exported register and printed beside the mark on the comment plan PDF — so item 12 in the register is the mark labelled 12 on the drawing, in the files you hand over.
Every zipBoard claim below is taken from zipBoard's own published material and was last checked on 27 August 2026. Software changes; if something here is out of date, tell us and we will correct it.
zipBoard can let a reviewer comment and annotate without creating an account. It states that collaborators “don’t need accounts to review — just share a link”, and that shared links “let guests comment and annotate directly — no sign-up required”. Share-link settings can also be configured to require sign-in, so this is an option rather than a rule. Xenmark reviewers are free, but they do sign in. If the hardest part of your review is getting people to take part, that difference matters.
Its tasks are tied to the marks they came from. Opening a task from the central list opens the Review Board and highlights the exact annotation, addressed by its own URL. That is the same relationship Xenmark builds a review around — the open question on this page is not whether zipBoard has it, but how much of it reaches the exported files.
It also does more with a comment than we do. A comment can become a task with an assignee, a due date, a priority and a status, and reviewers set an asset-level decision — Changes Requested, Feedback Given, Approved or Review Complete. It carries version control and review history, a project activity feed, and roles, permissions and SSO on Enterprise, and its AEC page documents a customised approval stamp and a personal e-signature dragged in from the review toolbar. It reviews web pages, video and design files as well as drawings, none of which Xenmark touches.
Two differences run the other way. zipBoard publishes no permanent free plan — a trial of about two weeks, then $99 a month. And on measurement it is explicit that there is no aggregated project measurement table and no CSV or Excel takeoff export — the values are kept with each annotation rather than collected into one place.
| Xenmark | zipBoard | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting a review | ||
| Can the person running the review start free? | Yes — the Free plan runs one active review at a time, start to finish | A trial, not a free plan. zipBoard’s own pricing page gives the length two ways — “Free 15-day trial for all plans” in one place and a 14-day trial in another — so call it about two weeks. After that the entry plan is $99 a month. |
| Do external reviewers need a paid subscription? | No — the people you invite read, reply and download the exports without paying | No — and a link can be shared that needs no account at all. zipBoard states that collaborators “don’t need accounts to review — just share a link”, and that shared links “let guests comment and annotate directly — no sign-up required”. Share-link settings can also require sign-in, so no-account access is an option rather than the only mode. Team and Agency both state unlimited collaborators and reviewers. |
| Available platforms | Any modern browser — nothing to install, and the people you invite join from a link | Browser. |
| How the review is structured | ||
| What the review is built from | A numbered comment. Anything drawn on the page belongs to that comment rather than standing on its own. | A Digital Asset Piece — a PDF, a drawing, a web page, a video or a design file uploaded into a project — with comments and markup on it, and tasks raised from those comments. |
| Replies | Threaded under the comment, each attributed and dated, with image attachments, and carried into the register | Yes — comments carry threads and @mentions. |
| Status workflow | Open, In progress and Closed — three fixed states, and the status travels into the Excel register | Yes, and further than ours. A comment can become a task with an assignee, a due date, a priority and a status. Separately, reviewers set an asset-level decision of Changes Requested, Feedback Given, Approved or Review Complete. |
| Comment numbering | Numbers are stable — delete comment 5 and the gap stays, so item 12 still means item 12 in every email and every export | Tasks carry identifiers, and opening a task highlights its exact annotation through its own URL. |
| One issue, several drawing locations | One comment can own several markers while keeping one number and one reply thread | zipBoard documents a task linked to its annotation — opening the task highlights that one mark. |
| Activity history | Every action timestamped and attributed to the person who made it | Yes. The project Activity section is “a running history of all modifications made to the project”, capturing the date of the change, who made it and a brief description. |
| Revision handling | Comments stay tied to the revision they were raised against, in one workflow | Versions are kept. zipBoard “automatically tracks all uploaded versions and displays them in a clear timeline”, with older versions listed below the newest and both the original and the new version reviewable and shareable. Saved measurements stay with the version they were made on. |
| Measuring and markup | ||
| Measuring on the drawing | Length, polylength, perimeter and area, calibrated to the page scale | Yes, and the set is broader than ours — line, area, arc, angle and count, with saved custom scale presets. Values are kept with the annotation on the document. Xenmark does not offer arc, angle or count. |
| Setting the drawing scale | Pick a standard scale, type your own, name the sheet size, or calibrate from a distance you already know | Yes — custom scale presets are supported. |
| Building your own reusable symbols | Check, cross, attention, arrow and cloud — five fixed review symbols, not a custom library | Custom approval stamps and a personal e-signature are documented, dragged in from the review toolbar — stronger than Xenmark for sign-off. |
| Measuring quantities for pricing a job | Not included — measurements are there to explain a comment, not to cost work | Partly. zipBoard positions its count tool for quantities rather than for pricing — “best for performing material takeoffs, fixture audits, or inventory tallies on floor plans and schematics”. What it does not do is aggregate those into a project-wide table, a bill of materials or a consolidated CSV or Excel takeoff export — zipBoard states that too. Xenmark does not attempt takeoff at all. |
| What comes out of the review | ||
| What you send back | The two documents come out ready to send — there is nothing to set up first, because the review was structured that way from the start | Two files, and they are both useful. An annotated PDF that “includes all the annotations and comments added during the review process”, and the project tasks exported as CSV. Task screenshots and the original uploaded files can also be downloaded. |
| Comment plan PDF | The drawing with each comment numbered and shown where it applies | Yes — an annotated PDF carrying the comments and markup from the review. |
| Spreadsheet output | An Excel file listing every comment, numbered to match the PDF | Yes — project tasks export to CSV. It is a task list rather than a register keyed to numbered marks on the sheet. |
| Measurements in the export | Drawn on the comment plan PDF where they were placed, and listed on their own sheet in the Excel file, kept separate from the comments | No, and zipBoard states it plainly. Measurements stay attached to the document; there is no aggregated project measurement table and no CSV or Excel takeoff export. |
| What you keep when the project ends | A single zip file — every revision's exports, the attachments and the full activity log, downloaded and stored on your side | Four separate downloads — the annotated PDF, the task CSV, task screenshots and the original uploaded files. |
| Branded reports | Your company logo and text on both deliverables, inherited from Company Settings — Plus and Pro | Reports exist. zipBoard advertises project and consolidated reports, with custom reports and insights on Enterprise, and a customised approval stamp can be dragged onto a document from the review toolbar. |
| What else each one does | ||
| Batch operations across many PDFs | Not included — a review works on one drawing set at a time | Bulk upload, yes. zipBoard handles “hundreds or thousands of files simultaneously”, naming blueprints and technical documents, though it excludes URLs and does not auto-tag. |
| Comparing two drawings against each other | Not included — differences get raised as comments by the people reviewing | Versions are tracked in a timeline, with both the original and the new version reviewable and shareable. |
| Working offline | Browser only, so you need a connection | Both products run in the browser and need a connection. Annotated PDFs can be downloaded and read offline. |
| Storing documents long term | Not what it is for. You download the exports and keep them wherever your project records already live. | Projects hold their Digital Asset Pieces with version control, within the plan’s limits — 20 pieces and 1 GB on Team, 100 on Agency. |
| CAD integrations and creating PDFs from CAD | None — a review starts from a PDF that has already been produced | No CAD integration is listed. Files are uploaded already produced, as in Xenmark — though zipBoard does integrate with Procore, which is where a construction drawing set often lives. |
| Connecting to a document management system | No integrations yet — the closing archive is a single zip you file wherever your records already live | Yes — zipBoard documents a Procore integration that syncs Procore project documents into zipBoard. Note the scope: “the sync will be one-way, meaning only new Procore documents will sync automatically”. Alongside it sit Jira, Wrike, Slack, MS Teams, Outlook, LambdaTest, Zapier and an API. Xenmark has no integrations. |
Xenmark has a permanent free tier; zipBoard does not. zipBoard publishes no permanent free plan: a trial of about two weeks, then Team at $99 a month for up to 20 Digital Asset Pieces and 1 GB, or Agency at $199 for up to 100 pieces and five managers, with Enterprise quoted. Xenmark is €14.99 – €59.99 / month, and the Free plan runs a complete review with nothing to pay.
The billing units also differ, and the difference is not cosmetic. zipBoard charges by Digital Asset Pieces and managers, with unlimited collaborators and reviewers included; Xenmark charges by project capacity and counts project members. A team with many reviewers and few drawings is cheap on zipBoard. A team with many drawings and few reviewers is cheap on Xenmark.
| Xenmark | zipBoard | |
|---|---|---|
| Billing unit | Per project capacity, monthly | By Digital Asset Pieces, storage and managers — not by reviewer seat. Monthly or annual subscriptions; the public cards show monthly starting prices |
| Entry point | Free — one active review, start to finish, no card | A trial of about two weeks — zipBoard’s pricing page states 15 days in one place and 14 in another |
| To run a review yourself | Free | From $99 a month once the trial ends |
| Paid range | €14.99 – €59.99 / month | Team From $99 a month; Agency From $199 a month; Enterprise quoted. Both are starting prices with no upper bound published |
| Invited reviewers | Free — no per-user charge; 5–30 project members depending on plan, and the person running the review is one of them | Free — a shared link can let a guest comment and annotate without signing up, and link settings can require sign-in instead |
| Tax basis | Including VAT | USD · fees exclude applicable taxes |
Xenmark — current as of 28 August 2026. zipBoard — checked 27 August 2026. The trial length is given two different ways on zipBoard’s own pricing page, 15 days in the plan copy and 14 in the questions below it, which is why this page says about two weeks rather than picking one. The page states that all fees are exclusive of any applicable taxes; Xenmark prices include VAT. Nothing here is converted or adjusted — a currency rate and a tax rate both depend on the buyer, and a plan counting Digital Asset Pieces cannot be set against one counting project capacity without first knowing how many drawings and how many people are involved.
No. zipBoard offers a free trial and then starts at $99 a month on the Team plan; there is no permanent free tier. The trial length is stated two ways on zipBoard’s own pricing page — 15 days in the plan copy, 14 days in the questions below it — so treat it as about two weeks and check at signup.
The Xenmark Free plan is not a trial. It runs one active review from start to finish, with the comment plan and the Excel register included, no card and no expiry.
No. Its documentation states that collaborators “don’t need accounts to review — just share a link”, and that shared links “let guests comment and annotate directly — no sign-up required”. Team and Agency both include unlimited collaborators and reviewers.
Xenmark reviewers are also free of charge, but they do sign in, and they count against the plan’s member limit — five on Free, thirty on Pro. The Project Manager then decides whether each one is a Participant, who replies and downloads exports, or an Editor, who creates comments and pins.
Yes for tasks. zipBoard exports project tasks in CSV, and separately downloads an annotated PDF that “includes all the annotations and comments added during the review process”, along with task screenshots and the original uploaded files.
Two things are worth separating. The CSV exports tasks, and zipBoard treats external feedback as its own thing that can be downloaded separately — so a guest comment is not automatically a row in the task CSV unless it becomes a task. In Xenmark the comment is the record from the moment it is raised, and the same number appears on the plan and in the register.
Measurements are supported and stay attached to the document. What zipBoard states plainly is that there is no aggregated project measurement table and no CSV or Excel takeoff export — so the values remain on the drawing rather than becoming data you can total or hand on.
Xenmark measures length, polylength, perimeter and area against the page scale and puts those values on their own sheet inside the same Excel file as the comments. It is not a takeoff or estimating product either, but the numbers do come out.
Version control and review history are part of the product. What the reviewed documentation does not establish is what happens to comments raised on an earlier version once a new one is uploaded — whether they stay attached to the version they were made against and remain readable.
In Xenmark that behaviour is the workflow: a comment is tied to the revision it was raised on, and all of the revisions stay inside the same review rather than one superseding the last.
Xenmark has the lower published starting cost and a permanent Free plan. zipBoard starts at $99 a month after a trial of about two weeks; Xenmark runs a complete review on the Free plan and its paid tiers are €14.99 – €59.99 / month.
Which paid product costs less for a particular team depends on the number of projects, content items, managers and reviewers, because the two count different things.
The comparison stops being simple once the numbers get large, because the billing units differ. zipBoard charges by Digital Asset Pieces and managers with unlimited reviewers; Xenmark charges by project capacity and counts project members. Fifty reviewers on twenty drawings and five reviewers on two hundred drawings are priced very differently by the two products. zipBoard’s figures are in US dollars with no tax basis stated; ours are in euro including VAT.
Only for the drawing part. zipBoard reviews web pages, video, design files and documents, turns comments into assigned tasks with due dates and approvals, and carries roles, permissions and SSO. Xenmark does none of that.
Where the two overlap is a PDF going out to several people for comment. Xenmark is built to end that with a numbered plan and a matching register.
When the reviewers must not have to create accounts at all. When comments need to become tracked, assigned work rather than a list to send back. When the review covers more than drawings. When there are many reviewers and few files, which is the shape its pricing rewards. And when SSO, roles and permissions are a requirement.
We sell Xenmark, so this is not an independent review. We have tried to describe zipBoard accurately, and every zipBoard claim on this page rests on zipBoard’s own published pages and help centre. The documents are named below. Capabilities and pricing change. zipBoard feature information was last checked on 27 August 2026, and the pricing on 27 August 2026.
zipBoard’s product pages and help articles are linked, so every claim here can be checked against the source it rests on. The pricing page is named rather than linked. Several rows on this page run in zipBoard’s favour and are quoted as they were found: a task opens and highlights its exact annotation, the project activity feed records who changed what and when, versions are kept in a timeline, Procore documents sync in, bulk upload handles thousands of files, and the count tool is sold for material takeoffs. The one claim zipBoard makes against itself — no aggregated measurement table and no CSV or Excel takeoff export — is quoted in its own words.
The Free plan takes a real drawing set end to end. No card, no time limit.
Start free