Open Relationships compared with Feeld
Feeld is the most widely recognised non-monogamy platform in the world and the closest thing we have to a direct competitor. This is where the two genuinely differ, written by people with an obvious stake in the answer.
How to read this
We built one of the two products being compared, so treat this as an argued case rather than a neutral review. Everything said about the other platform here is drawn from its own public description of itself and from what members tell us about using it. We do not link to competitors, and their details change, so check anything that matters to you directly with them.
What Feeld does well, stated plainly
Feeld earned its position. It has a wide range of gender and sexuality options, it supports couple profiles, and its Constellation feature lets members link several partner profiles together, which is a genuinely thoughtful piece of design for people in networks rather than pairs. It also has scale and brand recognition that no specialist competitor can match, and in a dating product scale is not a minor feature.
If you are in a large city, curious rather than committed, and want the widest possible pool of open-minded people including a substantial number who are not strictly non-monogamous, Feeld is a reasonable choice and we would say so.
Where we differ
| Open Relationships | Feeld | |
|---|---|---|
| Core population | Built specifically around open, polyamorous and ethically non-monogamous adults | Broad open-minded audience covering non-monogamy, kink, queer dating and the curious |
| Geographic focus | Six English-speaking markets with dedicated country and city communities | Global, concentrated in major metropolitan areas |
| Local depth | City pages covering how each local scene is actually organised | Location is a search radius |
| Structure on the profile | Arrangement, agreements and capacity are primary profile fields | Desires and partner linking, with structure described in the bio |
| Editorial content | Long-form guides on structures, boundaries and local scenes | Some editorial, more product-led |
| Tone | Candid and practical, aimed at people making real decisions | Design-led and exploratory |
The honest case for us
The difference that matters most is what the product assumes about you. Feeld is built for exploration, and that is a coherent design choice which serves a lot of people well. It means the population includes a great many members who are curious, experimenting, or on a general open-minded platform for reasons unrelated to non-monogamy.
We are built on the assumption that you already have a structure, or are seriously working one out, and that the useful thing is describing it accurately. Our profile fields ask about existing partners, about what has been agreed with them, and about what you realistically have room for. That is a narrower proposition and it filters harder, which is either the point or a limitation depending on what you want.
The second difference is geography. We cover six countries and go deep on the cities within them, because a non-monogamous community in Brighton is organised differently from one in Brisbane and knowing that changes how you search. A global platform cannot do this without either becoming enormous or becoming shallow.
The honest case against us
Scale. Feeld has been established for years and has a larger pool in most cities, and in dating that matters more than most product differences. If your local community is small, the platform with more members in it may simply be the better practical answer regardless of how well designed the alternative is.
Breadth is the second. If what you want is a wide, open-minded population where non-monogamy is one thread among several, our narrower focus is a drawback rather than a feature. And if you are still deciding whether non-monogamy is for you at all, a platform designed for exploration is a more comfortable place to do that.
What Constellation gets right, and what it leaves out
Feeld's Constellation feature, which lets a member link several partner profiles together, is the most thoughtful piece of design any mainstream non-monogamy product has shipped. It acknowledges that a person can be embedded in a network rather than attached to one other person, and it makes those connections visible rather than requiring an explanation.
What a linked graph does not capture is the part members most often say they need: the terms. Two people can be visibly connected on any platform and the connection can mean entirely different things. Whether either partner has any say in who the other sees, whether the relationship is hierarchical, whether anyone lives together, how much of the week is already accounted for. Those are the questions that decide whether a new connection is realistic, and none of them is a link between two profiles.
Our approach is to ask for them directly, as sentences, and to treat that as the primary content of a profile rather than as a bio underneath one. It costs more effort to fill in and it answers the question a reader actually has.
Using both
A large number of members use more than one platform, and there is no reason not to. The pattern we see most often is people using a broad platform for reach and a specialist one for depth, and finding that the conversations that begin in the two places have a noticeably different starting point.
If you want the background before choosing anything, what is an open relationship covers the structures and open relationship or polyamory covers the distinction people most often get wrong.
How we compare to other apps
Honest, unlinked comparisons against the platforms non-monogamous people actually use.
Open Relationships and Feeld
What is the main difference between Open Relationships and Feeld?
Feeld is built for exploration across a broad open-minded audience covering non-monogamy, kink and queer dating. Open Relationships is built on the assumption that you already have a relationship structure, or are seriously working one out, and asks about existing partners, agreements and capacity as primary profile fields.
Which has more members?
Feeld, in most cities. It has been established for years and has substantial brand recognition, and in dating a larger pool matters more than most product differences. If your local community is small, that may be the decisive factor.
Is Open Relationships a Feeld alternative?
For people who are settled in a non-monogamous structure and want depth rather than breadth, yes. For people still exploring whether non-monogamy suits them, a platform designed around exploration is likely to be a more comfortable fit.
Can I use both?
Many members do. The common pattern is a broad platform for reach and a specialist one for depth, and members report that conversations starting in the two places tend to begin from noticeably different assumptions.
We build one of the products described on this page. Details of other platforms change frequently, and nothing here should be treated as a current statement of their features. Check anything important with them directly.
Find your plus-one, two, or three
Join a community where relationship structure is the starting point rather than a profile tag.
Join