Loading…
Loading…
Which is the better screen recording for Mac in 2026?
We compared OBS Studio and Loom across 5 key factors including price, open-source status, and community adoption. For most users in 2026, OBS Studio is the better choice because it's open source. Read our full breakdown below.
Free and open-source streaming and recording
Record quick videos to share with your team
For most users in 2026, OBS Studio is the better choice because it's open source. However, Loom remains a solid option for users who prefer its unique features.
| Feature | OBS Studio | Loom |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Free | Free |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Monthly Installs | N/A | N/A |
| GitHub Stars | N/A | N/A |
| Category | Media & Entertainment | Productivity |
brew install --cask obsbrew install --cask loomOBS Studio, or Open Broadcaster Software, stands as a cornerstone in the realm of free and open-source, cross-platform software for real-time video and audio capture, mixing, recording, and live streaming. Its fundamental purpose is to empower users to craft professional-grade broadcasts and recordings by seamlessly integrating diverse sources such as window captures, images, text overlays, webcams, and capture cards into fully customizable scenes. This robust tool is a favorite among content creators, live streamers leveraging platforms like Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook Live, as well as educators and marketing professionals who necessitate absolute command over their video output. The software's stable release, version 32.0.4 as of December 14, 2025, ensures broad compatibility, supporting macOS 12.0 or newer and optimized for Apple Silicon, making it a powerful solution for Mac users seeking advanced video production capabilities.
Loom is a highly specialized video messaging tool designed to streamline screen recording and sharing, with a primary emphasis on asynchronous communication. Its core functionality revolves around enabling users to swiftly record their screen, webcam, and microphone, and then instantly disseminate the video via a shareable link. This approach significantly reduces the necessity for lengthy email exchanges or time-consuming live meetings, fostering more efficient communication. Loom is particularly well-suited for knowledge workers across a broad spectrum of roles, including designers, developers, product managers, customer support teams, marketers, and sales representatives, especially those operating within remote or hybrid work models. Available as a desktop application for Mac (OSX 10.15 and above) and a convenient Chrome extension, Loom prioritizes ease of use and rapid sharing, making it an indispensable tool for modern professional workflows.
OBS Studio provides high-performance, real-time screen and window capturing, offering users precise control over what is recorded. It allows for the selection of specific applications or entire displays, with extensive configuration options for resolution, frame rates, and various output formats. This granular control ensures professional-grade recordings tailored to specific needs, from detailed tutorials to dynamic gameplay capture, all within a highly customizable scene environment. Users can fine-tune every aspect of the capture process for optimal quality and performance.
Loom simplifies screen recording by enabling users to capture their full screen, a specific window, or a custom area with ease. It supports recording in up to 4K quality on its paid plans, ensuring crisp visuals. A key advantage is that videos are automatically uploaded to Loom's cloud, facilitating instant sharing without manual file transfers. While offering less granular control over technical settings compared to OBS, Loom excels in its straightforward, user-friendly approach to capturing and distributing screen content quickly and efficiently for communication purposes.
Verdict: OBS Studio offers superior technical control and flexibility for screen recording, making it better for professional productions, while Loom prioritizes ease of use and instant cloud sharing.
OBS Studio integrates webcams as a versatile source within its complex scene compositions. Users have complete freedom to precisely position, resize, and apply various filters to their webcam feed, blending it seamlessly with other elements like screen captures or images. This allows for highly customized layouts, such as picture-in-picture effects or dynamic overlays, essential for professional live streams and recordings. The ability to manipulate the webcam feed with advanced filters further enhances production quality and creative possibilities, making it a powerful tool for visual storytelling.
Loom records the webcam feed concurrently with the screen, providing convenient options for enhancing the visual presentation. Users can easily apply virtual backgrounds to maintain privacy or professionalism, utilize webcam frames for a polished look, and effortlessly toggle the camera on or off during a recording. While its webcam features are more focused on practical communication than complex production, Loom's integrated approach ensures that personal presence can be quickly and effectively added to any video message, enhancing engagement and clarity for the viewer.
Verdict: OBS Studio offers extensive control and integration for webcam use within complex scenes, whereas Loom provides user-friendly features like virtual backgrounds for quick communication.
OBS Studio features an intuitive and powerful audio mixer that provides per-source filters for advanced audio processing. Users can apply essential filters like noise gate for eliminating background noise, noise suppression for reducing constant hums, and gain control for adjusting volume levels. Furthermore, it supports VST plugins, opening up a world of professional-grade audio effects and enhancements. This comprehensive audio suite ensures that recordings and streams have pristine sound quality, crucial for any high-quality video production, giving creators full command over their soundscape.
Loom effectively captures both microphone audio and system audio, making it suitable for most communication needs. It includes a helpful audio indicator that allows users to verify sound input levels before commencing a recording, preventing silent videos. While it lacks the advanced filtering and VST plugin support found in OBS Studio, Loom's audio capabilities are perfectly adequate for clear voiceovers, presentations, and quick explanations. Its simplicity ensures that users can confidently record audio without needing deep technical knowledge, focusing instead on the message.
Verdict: OBS Studio provides vastly superior audio control and professional-grade processing capabilities, while Loom offers reliable and straightforward audio capture for general use.
Live streaming is a core and defining functionality of OBS Studio. It enables direct streaming to popular platforms such as Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook Live with an extensive array of configuration options. Users can fine-tune bitrate, select preferred encoders (like x264 or NVENC), and adjust server settings to optimize stream quality and stability for their specific internet connection and audience. This deep level of control makes OBS Studio the industry standard for professional broadcasters and content creators who demand reliable, high-quality live output with complex overlays and dynamic scene changes.
Loom is fundamentally designed for asynchronous video messaging and does not offer direct live streaming capabilities. Its purpose is to facilitate quick, recorded video communications that can be shared instantly via a link, rather than broadcasting in real-time to platforms like Twitch or YouTube. Users looking for live interaction or broadcast functionality will find Loom unsuitable for those specific needs. Its strengths lie entirely in its ability to create and share recorded content efficiently, not in live, synchronous delivery to a broad audience.
Verdict: OBS Studio is purpose-built for live streaming with unparalleled features, whereas Loom offers no live streaming functionality whatsoever.
OBS Studio, while powerful for capturing and streaming, lacks built-in advanced video editing features. Its primary focus is on real-time production. Users who wish to perform post-production edits—such as cutting, adding effects, or refining transitions—must export their raw recordings and import them into external video editing software like DaVinci Resolve, Adobe Premiere Pro, or Final Cut Pro. This means OBS acts as a robust capture tool, but not an all-in-one solution for the entire video production workflow, requiring additional tools for polished final products.
Loom includes native, user-friendly editing tools designed for quick refinements to video messages. Users can easily trim clips to remove unwanted sections, stitch multiple clips together, and add visual enhancements like text overlays, arrows, and box overlays to highlight key information. Furthermore, Loom offers AI features that can automatically remove pauses and filler words, significantly improving the conciseness and professionalism of recordings without requiring extensive manual effort. These tools make Loom highly efficient for producing polished, shareable content rapidly.
Verdict: Loom provides convenient built-in editing tools for quick video refinements, while OBS Studio requires external software for any post-production editing.
OBS Studio does not possess native annotation tools for use during recording, nor does it offer interactive elements post-recording. Its focus remains on the raw capture and composition of video and audio sources. While users can achieve visual annotations by integrating external graphics or overlays as sources within a scene, there's no direct drawing or highlighting functionality built into the recording process itself. Similarly, its output is a static video file, lacking any features for comments, reactions, or calls-to-action embedded within the video player experience.
Loom excels in providing annotation tools that enhance communication directly within the recording process. Users can highlight important areas on the screen dynamically while recording, drawing attention to specific details. Post-recording, Loom significantly boosts interactivity on shared videos by allowing for time-based comments, enabling precise feedback. Viewers can also react with emoji reactions and engage with integrated calls-to-action, making the video a more dynamic and collaborative experience. These features are crucial for effective asynchronous team communication and feedback loops.
Verdict: Loom offers robust built-in annotation and post-recording interactivity, which are completely absent in OBS Studio.
OBS Studio features a powerful virtual camera capability, allowing its meticulously crafted output—including complex scenes, multiple sources, and overlays—to be presented as a standard webcam input in other video conferencing applications. This means users can leverage OBS's advanced production features, such as green screen effects, custom branding, and dynamic scene switching, directly within platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or Google Meet. It transforms OBS into a professional studio hub for all virtual communication, greatly enhancing presentation quality and engagement in live online interactions.
Loom does not offer a standalone virtual camera feature. While it records the user's webcam and screen simultaneously, its webcam functionality is strictly integrated into its own recording process. It cannot be used to feed a processed video output into other third-party video conferencing applications as a virtual webcam. This limitation means users cannot leverage Loom's webcam features to enhance their presence or presentation in external live meetings, distinguishing its use case from OBS Studio's more versatile broadcasting capabilities.
Verdict: OBS Studio functions as a highly versatile virtual camera, allowing its output to be used in other applications, a feature completely absent in Loom.
OBS Studio is renowned for its robust scene composition and management capabilities, allowing users to create an unlimited number of scenes, each with multiple sources (e.g., screen capture, webcam, images, text). It offers seamless transitions between these scenes, enabling dynamic and professional-looking broadcasts. The modular UI provides extensive layout customization, where docks can be rearranged to suit individual workflows. Furthermore, OBS supports a vast ecosystem of plugins and scripts, offering unparalleled customization and extensibility beyond its core features, making it the ultimate tool for complex productions.
Loom offers some basic customization options primarily focused on personalizing the webcam appearance, such as applying virtual backgrounds and frames. However, it fundamentally lacks the extensive scene-building capabilities, multi-source integration, and seamless transition features that define OBS Studio. Loom's design prioritizes quick, single-purpose recordings rather than complex, multi-layered video productions. While sufficient for its intended use case of simple video messaging, it does not provide the granular control or creative freedom for intricate visual compositions that advanced users or streamers might require.
Verdict: OBS Studio offers vastly superior scene management and customization through its modular UI, plugins, and script support, while Loom provides only basic customization for webcam appearance.
For a professional live streamer, OBS Studio is the only viable choice. Its extensive configuration options for bitrate, encoders, and server settings, combined with robust scene management, multi-source mixing, and virtual camera capabilities, are essential for producing high-quality, dynamic live broadcasts to platforms like Twitch or YouTube. Loom simply lacks any live streaming functionality, making it unsuitable for this demanding use case where real-time production control is paramount.
A remote team member frequently needs to explain complex ideas, provide feedback, or update colleagues without scheduling live meetings. Loom is perfectly suited for this, enabling quick screen, webcam, and microphone recordings with instant sharing via a link. Its built-in editing, annotations, and interactive comments foster efficient asynchronous communication, reducing email clutter and meeting fatigue. While OBS can record, its complexity and lack of integrated sharing make it cumbersome for rapid, daily team interactions.
An online educator often requires dynamic presentations, blending live lectures with screen shares, webcam presence, and pre-recorded elements. OBS Studio's scene management allows for seamless transitions between these components, while its virtual camera can feed a polished output into video conferencing tools. For creating high-quality, engaging course content or live interactive lessons, the control over audio, video, and overlays offered by OBS is invaluable. Loom's simplicity is limiting for the multifaceted demands of advanced online teaching.
A product manager providing feedback on designs, bugs, or feature implementations needs to do so quickly and clearly. Loom excels here by allowing them to record their screen, highlight specific UI elements with annotations, and explain their thoughts verbally. The instant share link and time-based comments facilitate rapid iteration with development and design teams. OBS, with its focus on production, would be overkill and too time-consuming for the frequent, informal, yet precise feedback loops typical in product development.
For a content creator operating on a tight budget, OBS Studio is an unparalleled choice. It is completely free and open-source, providing professional-grade recording and streaming capabilities without any cost. This allows them to invest their resources elsewhere, like better audio equipment or lighting. While Loom has a free tier, its limitations on video length and count would quickly hinder a prolific content creator. OBS offers the tools to produce high-quality content from day one, without financial barriers.
Switching from OBS Studio to Loom typically signifies a shift from complex production to streamlined, asynchronous communication. Users will need to download and install the Loom desktop app or its Chrome extension. The primary adjustment involves embracing Loom's simplified interface, where recording starts with minimal setup. Instead of managing scenes and sources, users will simply select screen, webcam, and microphone inputs and hit record. Existing OBS recordings are local files; they can be downloaded from Loom if previously uploaded, or directly uploaded to Loom if they meet its length and storage criteria (especially for free users). The workflow becomes cloud-centric, with immediate sharing via links, moving away from local file management and external editing. Expect a significant reduction in setup time but a loss of granular control.
Migrating from Loom to OBS Studio usually indicates a desire for more advanced video production, live streaming, or greater control over recordings. Users must first download and install OBS Studio. The learning curve will be substantial, as they'll need to familiarize themselves with setting up 'scenes' (combinations of video/audio sources), adding individual 'sources' (screen, webcam, microphone, images), configuring audio filters, and understanding encoding settings for recording or streaming. Any videos previously recorded with Loom would remain hosted on Loom's platform, or could be downloaded and imported into a video editor for post-production before being used in an OBS workflow or uploaded elsewhere. This transition requires dedication to learn a more powerful, but complex, tool.
When switching, clearly define your core need: is it professional production or quick communication? Leverage tutorials for OBS or embrace Loom's simplicity. Remember OBS outputs local files requiring external editing, while Loom is cloud-based with integrated basic tools. Backup existing videos from the platform you're leaving. Adjust expectations regarding complexity vs. speed.
Winner
Runner-up
The comparison between OBS Studio and Loom reveals two powerful tools, each excelling in distinct domains. OBS Studio emerges as the overall winner for its unparalleled versatility, professional-grade features, and open-source accessibility. It's the definitive choice for anyone requiring advanced live streaming, complex video production, and granular control over every technical aspect. However, Loom is an exceptional runner-up, dominating the niche of quick, asynchronous video messaging and team collaboration with its ease of use, instant sharing, and integrated editing. The 'best' tool is ultimately dictated by your specific needs: choose OBS for power and control, or Loom for speed and simplicity in communication.
Bottom Line: Choose OBS Studio for professional live streaming and complex video production; choose Loom for quick, efficient asynchronous video communication.
ProgrammingKnowledge • 53.4K views
Justin Brown - Primal Video • 1.0M views
TroubleChute • 118.7K views
MidnightMan • 148.5K views
Browse screen recording apps, read our complete guide, or discover curated bundles.
Explores various tools and applications designed for capturing computer screen activity, including their features, performance, and target users.
Covers software and hardware solutions essential for broadcasting live video content to online platforms, focusing on production quality, encoding, and platform integration.
Focuses on tools and strategies for non-real-time video messaging, facilitating efficient communication, feedback, and collaboration in remote or hybrid work environments.
Last verified: Feb 15, 2026
Accessed Feb 15, 2026
Accessed Feb 15, 2026
Accessed Feb 15, 2026
Accessed Feb 15, 2026
Research queries: OBS Studio vs Loom Mac comparison; OBS Studio features 2026; Loom features 2026; OBS Studio pricing; Loom pricing plans; OBS Studio performance Mac; Loom performance Mac; OBS Studio user experience; Loom user experience; OBS Studio community support; Loom customer support; OBS Studio recent updates 2025 2026; Loom recent updates 2025 2026