Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| Custom Fields for Gutenberg | TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Custom Fields for Gutenberg | TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.9 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 17 | 13 |
| Active installs | 1,000+ | 500+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
Custom Fields for Gutenberg and TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress are evenly matched on rating (4.9★ vs 5.0★) — the differentiator comes down to pricing fit, feature breadth, and which app's interaction pattern suits your team's workflow.
Recommended evaluation path: install both apps' free tiers (where available) and run them in parallel on a small cohort for 7-14 days before committing. The data tables below show the per-feature breakdown — for most site owners the deciding factor will be a single integration or workflow detail that's hard to compare from listing pages alone.
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: Custom Fields for Gutenberg audit • TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress audit
| Keyword | Custom Fields for Gutenberg | TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress |
|---|---|---|
| chat bot | #91 | Not ranked |
| custom form | #108 | Not ranked |
| feedback form | #822 | Not ranked |
No tracked changes.
Custom Fields for Gutenberg (4.9★, 17 reviews) and TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress (5.0★, 13 reviews) are essentially tied on rating. Look at review velocity and individual reviewer quotes — both visible on each app's detail page — to differentiate.
TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.9★). 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. Custom Fields for Gutenberg has the deeper published review base (17 vs 13), 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.
Custom Fields for Gutenberg typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (17 reviews). TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (13 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. Custom Fields for Gutenberg and TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress 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 TailPress – Tailwind for WordPress" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
