PDFfiller vs. PDFescape

by Andria Pacina
PDFfiller vs. PDFescape

The main difference between PDFfiller and PDFescape involves the features offered by each program. PDFfiller has more advanced features for its eSignature, reporting and analytics, and many more. Meanwhile, PDFescape has basic features for editing, form filling, security, and collaboration.

PDFfiller vs. PDFescape Comparison

 Workflow AutomationMobile and Other DevicesBulk Signing CapabilityVersion Control and History
PDFfillerAdvanced featuresYesSend up to 20 recipientsYes
PDFescapeBasic featuresLimitedNot availableNot available


As far as compliance is concerned, PDFfiller openly talks about its compliance with HIPAA, GDPR, and UETA regulations. With these three compliance structures in place, you can be sure that your sensitive data is protected when you use PDFfiller. 

It is a suitable option for those in the healthcare field since it is compliant with HIPAA standards. You also have a guarantee that your electronic transactions and signatures are honored, thanks to UETA compliance. 

Meanwhile, PDFescape only comes with GDPR compliance, which protects the personal data of individuals within the EU. 

Contract Lifecycle Management 

When it comes to contract lifecycle management features, PDFfiller wins in this PDFfiller vs. PDFescape comparison guide. This is because it offers several features that can help make your experience a lot better. 

PDFfiller allows you to create and edit PDF documents as PDFescape does. Both options can also be used for form filling, annotations, and markup. But this is where their similarities come to an end. 

PDFescape does not have the advanced features that dedicated contract management solutions provide. Meanwhile, PDFfiller allows document collaboration and storage. It also has a form and template feature to create and manage these easily. 

Electronic Signature Integration 

Another feature that makes PDFfiller stand out over PDFescape is its eSignature integration. But when comparing PDFfiller and PDFescape’s eSignature feature, the latter cannot hold up its game. 

This is because PDFescape only offers basic eSignature capabilities. It does not offer integration features, unlike PDFfiller, which offers API integration and eSignature authentication. PDFfiller also allows you to add signatures to a PDF and use a digital certificate eSignature. 

These features are not available with PDFescape. 

PDFfiller vs. PDFescape

Document Storage 

PDFfiller also wins with its document storage features, which give its users cloud storage. Meanwhile, PDFescape has limited document storage options. It does not have a dedicated document storage feature compared to PDFfiller and other platforms.

Despite the absence of a dedicated document storage feature, you can still use PDFescape and store your PDF files locally. You can also upload these files to cloud services to manage them better. 

PDFfiller works as an alternative to PDFescape since it provides you with several options to choose from. Apart from cloud storage, PDFfiller has an organizational system where you can store your documents in folders. This provides you with a structured and efficient system for your documents. 

Contract Repository 

PDFfiller also works as an PDFescape alternative if you’re looking for a tool with a contract repository. With this platform, you can easily upload and fill contracts. 

PDFfiller also has a document management suite where you can easily browse your contracts. This tool also allows you to review your documents, so you don’t have to do it all on your own.  The repository also has a My Documents tab where you can sort, rename, delete, and duplicate documents easily. 

On the other hand, PDFescape does not have a dedicated contract repository for your documents. You need to monitor your contracts if you plan to use PDFescape manually. 


PDFescape cannot be used as an alternative to PDFfiller if you are looking for a tool with integrations. This is because it does not offer extensive integrations with third-party applications. 

On the other hand, PDFfiller offers several integrations, including API, cloud storage, and other popular CRMs. 

Audit Trails and Logs

Another feature to consider in this PDFescape vs. PDFfiller comparison is the platform’s audit trails and logs. Unfortunately, PDFescape does not offer this feature to users. 

PDFfiller offers an audit trail feature where you can keep track of all your account activity. This includes a detailed log of the things happening in your documents, such as uploads, edits, and sharing. 

You can also take a look at the log to search for activities that happened in the past. This is all thanks to its fully searchable feature and filter range. 

PDFfiller vs. PDFescape

Fill: A Suitable Option 

If you’re looking for another PDFfiller alternative, Fill is one tool you should consider. This is because it offers just about all of the features that PDFfiller has. 

One of the features that make Fill stand out over its competitors is that it has its eSignature tool that you can use. If you need to send a document for signature, you can easily do that on Fill’s platform. With the tool, your recipient can easily affix his signature in no time. 

Fill also has a customizable template gallery. With this feature, you don’t have to keep writing your contracts from scratch. And like PDFfiller, Fill is HIPAA, GDPR, and UETA compliant, so you’re sure your documents are safe.

Sign up for an account today to start editing your PDF files on one platform.

Related Stories

Blueberry PDF Filler vs. PDF Pro

Blueberry PDF Filler vs. PDF Pro

The main difference between Blueberry PDF Filler and PDF Pro is signature integration. Blueberry PDF Filler excels in eSignature workflows, employing signNow's system for efficient document signing. PDF Pro, however, lacks an integrated eSignature feature.

Wondershare PDFelement vs. Foxit

Wondershare PDFelement vs. Foxit

The main difference between Wondershare PDFelement and Foxit revolves around distinctive features and integrations. PDFelement provides cloud storage and custom branding. Foxit boasts numerous third-party integrations and is recognized for its user-friendly interface and rapid performance.

Foxit vs. Bluebeam

Foxit vs. Bluebeam

The main difference between Foxit and Bluebeam lies in their user interface. Foxit is more user-friendly, while Bluebeam has more advanced features and a steeper learning curve. Foxit offers an easy navigation experience, while Bluebeam caters to users needing advanced PDF editing.

Get great articles direct to your inbox

    We’ll never share your details with third parties.
    View our Privacy Policy for more info.