Nodum vs Tana
A Tana alternative built on plain markdown you can export
Nodum is an open-source alternative to Tana for people who want plain files rather than a structured graph database. Tana is a proprietary, subscription outliner built on supertags and fields, which is powerful for structured capture. Nodum stores markdown files, links them with wikilinks, and is MIT licensed and self-hostable.
What Tana is
Tana is a proprietary outliner where nodes carry supertags and typed fields, so the same content can behave like a database, a task list and a note at once. It is genuinely novel and well liked by people doing heavy structured capture, and it is cloud-only and subscription-based.
Side by side
| Property | Tana | Nodum |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Proprietary, closed source | MIT — the whole stack, frontend and backend |
| Hosting | Tana's cloud; no self-hosting | Hosted at nodum.md, or self-hosted with one Docker Compose command |
| Your notes are | A hosted structured graph, not files | Plain markdown files, exported as a folder-true zip whenever you ask |
| Linking | Node references, supertags and fields | [[wikilinks]], [[path/Note]], [[Note|alias]], ![[embeds]] — Obsidian syntax |
| Graph | Structured views rather than a force-directed graph | Global and local force-directed graph, GPU-rendered on WebGL2 |
| Pricing model | Subscription, with a limited free tier | Free and open source; self-host at your own infrastructure cost |
| Platforms | Browser, desktop, mobile | Any modern browser, desktop and mobile; installable as a PWA |
| Getting out | JSON export; markdown export is limited | Vault zip of .md files, plus a REST API and an MCP server |
Where each one actually wins
The left-hand column is the honest part. If none of it applies to you, the switch is probably worth making; if several do, it probably is not.
What Tana does better
- Supertags and typed fields are more expressive than tags plus frontmatter.
- Structured capture and live views over your own schema.
- Voice capture and meeting workflows are unusually well built.
What Nodum does better
- Markdown files with a real export, rather than a hosted structured graph.
- Free and MIT licensed, with self-hosting available.
- A force-directed knowledge graph, backlinks with context, unlinked mentions.
- No subscription and no per-seat cost.
So — switch, or stay?
Switch to Nodum if…
- You want an exit that produces ordinary markdown.
- You are paying for structure you do not use.
Stay on Tana if…
- Supertags and typed fields are how your system works.
Tana and Nodum: common questions
Is there a free, open-source alternative to Tana?
Nodum is the closest for linked note-taking: free, MIT licensed, self-hostable, with wikilinks, backlinks, tags, YAML frontmatter properties and a knowledge graph. It does not replicate Tana's supertags and typed-field system, which has no direct open-source equivalent.
Before you move anything
Whatever you decide, run this once. It takes ten minutes and it is the difference between a migration and an incident.
- Export from Tana first, and keep that export somewhere safe.
- Import a copy into a throwaway Nodum vault, not your main one.
- Open the graph and look for ghost nodes — those are links that did not resolve.
- Export the Nodum vault and diff it against what you put in.
- Only then delete anything.
Other comparisons
Every comparison is on the alternatives index, and the glossary defines the vocabulary these pages use.
Bring your Tana notes with you.
Import a zip, look at the graph, export it again. Nothing about it is one-way.