Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| Canonical Attachments | Unique Headers | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Canonical Attachments | Unique Headers |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 3.7 ★ | ★ 4.9 ★ |
| Total reviews | 3 | ★ 160 |
| Active installs | 300+ | 10,000+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, Unique Headers is the stronger choice for most WordPress Plugin Directory site owners — 4.9★ vs Canonical Attachments's 3.7★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Unique Headers has the larger user base (160 reviews vs 3), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Canonical Attachments's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage site owners who need fast install and low risk should default to Unique Headers; mid-market and enterprise site owners with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Canonical Attachments's 3-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Unique Headers's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical WordPress Plugin Directory listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Canonical Attachments audit • Unique Headers audit
| Keyword | Canonical Attachments | Unique Headers |
|---|---|---|
| contact | Not ranked | #417 |
| contact form | Not ranked | #549 |
| feedback form | #687 | Not ranked |
| custom form | Not ranked | #869 |
No tracked changes.
Unique Headers has the higher average rating (4.9★ from 160 reviews) compared to Canonical Attachments (3.7★ from 3 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Unique Headers holds the higher average rating (4.9★ vs 3.7★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the WordPress Plugin Directory. Unique Headers has the deeper published review base (160 vs 3), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
Canonical Attachments typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (3 reviews). Unique Headers typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (160 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Canonical Attachments and Unique Headers both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Canonical Attachments" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
