Watermarkly wins every row it can, 9.0/10 against 8.4. It brands faster, batches larger — 500-plus photos per run against Star Watermark’s desktop queue — keeps tiling, opacity and EXIF fields intact, and does the whole job locally in the browser, so no photo is uploaded anywhere.
Star Watermark answers the one thing Watermarkly cannot. It takes video and stills through the same queue, where Watermarkly is images and PDF only. It is also bought once, at $39.95 for a lifetime licence, against $19.95 a year that renews forever.
Watermarkly
Star Watermark
Watermarkly wins in this comparison.
Every value comes from the same test set. The highlighted cell is the one that wins the row.
| Criterion | Watermarkly | Star Watermark |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 9.0/10 (wins this row) | 8.4/10 |
| Output quality | 9.0 (wins this row) | 8.4 |
| Ease of use | 9.2 (wins this row) | 8.0 |
| Speed | 9.0 (wins this row) | 8.6 |
| Value | 8.7 (wins this row) | 8.4 |
| Batch handling | 9.6 (wins this row) | 9.2 |
| Starting price | $19.95/year (wins this row) | $39.95 one-time |
| Free export | Free, but output carries a Watermarkly logo alongside yours | Free tier does text marks only, and locks angle, opacity and layers |
| Media handled | image, pdf | image, video |
| Runs on | Web, Windows, macOS (wins this row) | Windows, macOS |
Watermarkly is the strongest batch watermarker on this bench and the local-processing angle is a real advantage rather than marketing: the files never leave your machine, which matters for client work and for anything under NDA. Its free tier stamps a Watermarkly logo next to yours, so treat it as a trial rather than a plan.
Star Watermark buys two things Watermarkly does not sell: video, and an end to renewals. The costs are a Windows and macOS restriction and a workflow that syncs nothing, so templates stay on the machine that made them. Two years in, it is the cheaper of the two. The add-watermark guides cover the workflow either way.
No. It covers images and PDFs only. Star Watermark takes video and stills through one queue, and [Filmora](/filmora-review/) handles video branding from saved presets if you already edit there.
No. Everything runs locally in the browser, so the images never leave your machine. That is unusual for a web tool and it is the main reason photographers pick it over cloud alternatives.
Yes, $39.95 for a lifetime licence, against Watermarkly’s $19.95 a year. Its free tier does text marks only, with angle, opacity and layers locked, so the free build is not a working tool.
Watermarkly, at 9.6/10 on batch handling — the highest score on our bench — with saved templates that move between machines and teammates. The [photographer watermark guide](/watermark-for-photographers/) covers sizing and placement for large sets.
Watermarkly won 8 of the 10 rows above and scores 9.0/10 overall. Star Watermark is still the better answer in the cases listed above.