Team Seats: What Each Platform Includes, and What the Next One Costs

Seats are where a tier that looked affordable stops being affordable. They are also the least consistently published number in this category: two platforms on this rack give you an exact per-seat price, one gives you a cap and no price, and two give you neither.

This sheet collects what each publishes. Read on 21 September 2026 from vendor pricing pages.

Duda: counts published, prices not

Duda publishes team-seat counts by tier and nothing else.

• Basic: 3 seats.
• Team: 6 seats.
• Agency: 6 seats.
• White Label: custom.

What does not appear anywhere on the pricing page is what a seat beyond the included count costs. There is no per-seat figure in the table at all.

For a studio of four or five people this never becomes a problem — six seats covers a small team comfortably, and the jump from Basic's three to Team's six is one of the more sensible reasons to move up a tier. For a studio growing past six on Agency, it becomes a conversation with sales and a budget line you cannot forecast, which is an awkward position to discover yourself in after committing a client book.

Worth noting: the seat count does not rise between Team and Agency. Both are six. If seats are the reason you are considering the move from Team to Agency, they are not a reason — export, four included projects and role permissions are. The full tier reading is on the Duda agency sheet.

Webflow: published, and stacked on top of two other bills

Webflow publishes its seat prices precisely, which is welcome, and the figures need reading alongside the rest of the Webflow bill rather than on their own.

One seat is included with a workspace. Beyond that, billed yearly: a full seat is $39 a month, a limited seat is $15 a month, and reviewer or commenter seats are free.

That free reviewer tier deserves more attention than it gets, because in agency work a large proportion of the people who need to see a site never need to change it — account managers, client stakeholders, a copywriter checking a proof. Putting those people on free seats rather than paid ones is the single easiest saving on a Webflow bill.

The complication is that seats sit on top of Webflow's two existing layers. A site plan is charged per published site — Basic at $15 a month billed yearly, Premium at $25. A workspace plan is charged per account — free on Starter, $19 a month yearly on Core, $49 on Growth. Seats are a third line. A three-person studio wanting code export and one client site is paying a site plan plus a Core workspace plus two additional seats, and that is before the second client.

This is the most commonly under-stated cost in the category, because most comparison articles quote one of the three layers and move on.

Framer: the cheapest seats on the rack, with a hard cap

Framer publishes the lowest per-seat figures here and the clearest role split.

Viewers are free on every plan. Additional design editors are $20 a month each. Content editors — restricted to CMS, localisation and on-page editing — are $10 a month each. The ceiling is ten users with edit access on both Basic and Pro, unlimited only on Enterprise.

There is one genuinely useful agency provision: Framer Pro Experts get free editor access on any client project. For a studio whose staff hold that status, that removes the seat cost from client work entirely, which changes the arithmetic substantially.

The ten-user cap is the thing to check before scaling. It applies to both Basic and Pro, so it is not something a tier upgrade solves short of Enterprise. A fifteen-person studio cannot put everyone in Framer, and a workaround built on shared logins is a security problem rather than a solution.

Wix Studio and Squarespace: no published seat prices

Wix's agency page names team permissions and role definitions — defining roles for stakeholders, granting project-specific permissions, providing administrative controls — without attaching a seat count or a per-seat price to any of it. Wix Studio pricing renders client-side and returns no figures to a direct read, so nothing about seats can be stated here with confidence.

Squarespace's model is different in kind. Sites carry contributors with defined permission levels rather than an account holding metered seats, so the relevant limit is per-site rather than per-studio. Circle itself is a discount and trial programme and publishes nothing about seats.

For both, the honest position is that this sheet does not know, and neither will you until you ask. That absence is treated the same way everywhere on this site: an unpublished figure is recorded as unpublished, and the platform is scored as though the permission cannot be budgeted for, which is the rule set out on how we check white label.

A seat and a permission are not the same purchase

Worth separating, because the two get conflated constantly and they are billed differently.

A seat is a person who can log in. A permission is what that person is allowed to do once they are in. Platforms charge for the first and gate the second behind a tier, and an agency can easily buy enough of one and none of the other.

Webflow is the clearest example. Seats are available on any workspace, including the free Starter. But site-level roles and publishing permissions arrive on the Growth workspace at $49 a month billed yearly — so a studio on Core can add paid seats all day and still cannot restrict which of those people is allowed to publish to a live client site. That is a permissions purchase wearing a seat-shaped question.

Duda runs the same split the other way round. Role-based permissions are described as an Agency-plan feature, while the seat count does not change between Team and Agency at all. You are buying the permission at that step, not the capacity.

So before adding a seat, establish which of the two you actually needed. A studio that adds three seats to solve a problem that was really about publishing control has spent money and not fixed anything.

Three seat decisions worth making deliberately

Separate the people who edit from the people who look. This is the biggest lever and most studios never pull it. Webflow and Framer both offer a free viewing role and a cheaper restricted-editing role. Every person moved from a full seat to a limited or free one is a saving that repeats monthly, permanently.

Count contractors properly. A freelancer who works on two projects a year still occupies a seat all twelve months on most platforms, unless you remember to remove them. Adding removal to the end of a project checklist is a genuinely worthwhile five seconds.

Check the cap before the price. A per-seat price you can pay is a smaller problem than a hard ceiling you cannot buy past. Framer's ten-user limit on Basic and Pro is the clearest example on this rack: the cost is low and the wall is real.

The wider shape of it

Seat pricing tends to be inversely related to white-label ambition, and the pattern is worth noticing. Framer, which offers no agency apparatus at all, has the cheapest and clearest seats. Webflow, which offers real ownership mechanics, charges the most per seat and stacks them on two other layers. Duda, which offers the most complete rebrand on this rack, publishes generous counts and no overage price.

None of that makes any of them wrong. It does mean that comparing tier headline prices alone will mislead you in both directions, which is why the best website builder for agencies rack is ordered on permissions rather than on price.