Overleaf vs Papeeria: which free LaTeX editor?
Both are browser-based collaborative LaTeX editors with a free tier, and the free tiers are limited in opposite directions. Overleaf lets you keep as many projects as you like but caps a free project at one collaborator, and keeps Git and GitHub for paid plans. Papeeria allows unlimited collaborators and Git sync with public repositories, but only one active private project at a time. So: pick Overleaf if you mostly write alone and want the larger template and package ecosystem, and Papeeria if you need to write with several people for free.
Free tiers, side by side
| Feature | Overleaf | Papeeria | KL studio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free tier | Free plan available[source] | Free plan (Epsilon)[source] | Free, no paid tier yet (public alpha) |
| Paid plans from | Student EUR 7.25/mo; Standard EUR 15/mo; Pro EUR 30.75/mo[source] | Delta from USD 5/mo; free for students[source] | No paid plan |
| Collaborators per project, free tier | 1 collaborator per project[source] | Unlimited collaborators per project[source] | No per-project seat cap |
| Private projects, free tier | Unlimited projects[source] | One active private project[source] | Unlimited |
| Git integration, free tier | Premium only — Git and GitHub are premium features[source] | Read-write sync with public repositories; private repos are paid[source] | Not yet |
| File history, free tier | Premium only — project history is a premium feature[source] | Last 24 hours (30 days on the paid plan)[source] | Live collaborative history |
| Reference manager | External — Zotero/Mendeley integration is a premium feature; on the free plan, export a .bib file and upload it[source] | External — Mendeley integration on the paid plan[source] | Built in — import from arXiv, Crossref, PubMed, OpenAlex, or a Zotero library, then cite by key |
| Typst support | LaTeX only | LaTeX only | Yes (alpha) |
Facts about Overleaf and Papeeria are quoted from each vendor's own pricing page or documentation on the checked date, with the source linked per row. We publish no compile-speed or latency comparison for either product: we have not measured them, and we do not make performance claims about software we have not benchmarked.
A note on compile timeouts and quotas
Both vendors publish a cap on how long one compile may run. These are their own documented plan limits, not measurements we made — we have not benchmarked either product's speed, and a timeout is a ceiling, not a typical compile time. They are listed here rather than in the table because they are not comparable like for like.
- Overleaf: Compile timeout is 10 seconds on the free plan and 240 seconds on premium plans.[source]
- Papeeria: Every compilation cycle of a free project is expected to complete in 60 seconds; the process is stopped when that expires.[source]
- Papeeria: Paid projects time out at 120 seconds by default, and that can be raised per project on request.[source]
- Papeeria: Free projects also have a 64 MiB disk quota covering sources and all generated artifacts, enforced on compile and on Git sync.[source]
- KL studio: No published compile timeout. Our own measured compile times, and the method behind them, are on the main comparison page.
Papeeria's documentation carries a 2019 copyright, so treat its figures as the vendor's latest published position rather than a freshly reviewed one. Overleaf's and Papeeria's limits are also not like for like: Overleaf caps a single compile, while Papeeria frames the same ceiling as a CPU quota on a shared environment.
Straight from the vendors: Overleaf plan limits · Papeeria usage quotas · Papeeria compilation timeouts
Which one should you pick?
Choose Overleaf if you are writing mostly on your own, or if your department, journal, or supervisor already standardises on it. Its template library and documentation are the largest of any online editor, and for a solo author the free tier's one-collaborator cap never comes up.
Choose Papeeria if you need to write with several people without paying. Unlimited collaborators on the free plan is the clearest difference between the two, and free Git sync with public repositories suits an open thesis or a paper drafted in the open. The one-active-private-project limit is the trade-off to check first.
Where KL studio fits
KL studio is a third free option, and it is a different shape: it puts a reference library inside the editor. You import papers from arXiv, Crossref, PubMed, OpenAlex, or an existing Zotero library, then cite them by key without maintaining a .bib file by hand. Both of the others connect to a reference manager too — Zotero and Mendeley on Overleaf, Mendeley on Papeeria — on their paid plans; the difference is that here the library is part of the editor rather than a service it links out to. It also compiles Typst as well as LaTeX, and has no per-project collaborator cap.
The honest caveats: it is in public alpha, there is no Git integration yet, and the template library is nowhere near Overleaf's. It is worth a look if the reference handling is the part of your workflow that hurts; if you need journal templates today, it is not the right tool yet.
We publish our own compile-speed measurements and the method behind them, but deliberately publish no speed comparison against Overleaf or Papeeria — we have not benchmarked either, and we would rather say so than guess.