11 Freelance Sites Founded Before 2019: Compared and Evaluated

If you’re trying to decide where to sell your services or hire talent online, the sheer number of freelance platforms can feel overwhelming. The good news is that sites with a long track record offer proven stability, but they also come with different trade-offs. This list compares eleven established freelance platforms that launched before 2019, breaking down their strengths, weaknesses, and what makes each one distinct. Whether you prioritize low fees, specific niches, or community support, this comparison will help you make an informed choice.

1. Legiit

   Legiit stands out for its focus on digital marketing services, making it a strong choice if you work in SEO, content creation, social media, or related fields. Unlike general platforms that dilute your profile among thousands of unrelated categories, Legiit keeps the marketplace tightly focused, which means buyers arrive with specific needs in mind.

   One major advantage is the fee structure. Legiit charges sellers a flat monthly subscription rather than taking a percentage of each transaction, so you keep more of what you earn. This model works especially well for active freelancers who complete multiple projects each month. The trade-off is that the platform is smaller than giants like Upwork, so you’ll find fewer total job postings. However, the quality of leads tends to be higher because buyers understand the niche.

   The community aspect is another differentiator. Legiit offers training resources and actively supports sellers in building their businesses, not just completing one-off gigs. If you value a platform that invests in your growth and doesn’t penalize success with escalating fees, Legiit deserves serious consideration.

2. Upwork

   Upwork dominates the freelance space with the largest client base and the widest variety of job categories. If sheer volume matters to you, this platform delivers more opportunities than almost any competitor. You can find everything from short tasks to long-term contracts, and clients range from startups to Fortune 500 companies.

   The downside is competition and cost. Upwork charges freelancers a sliding fee that starts at 20% for the first $500 earned with each client, dropping to 10% after you pass the $10,000 mark with that same client. This structure penalizes new freelancers and those who work with many different clients on smaller projects. Upwork also uses a credit system for proposals, which means you pay to apply for jobs, adding another layer of expense.

   The platform’s size also means you’re competing against thousands of other freelancers, many of whom offer very low rates. If you can establish long-term client relationships and move past the initial fee tier, Upwork becomes more economical. For beginners or those working on many small projects, the costs add up quickly.

3. Fiverr

   Fiverr built its reputation on fixed-price gigs, which offers clarity that hourly platforms lack. Buyers know exactly what they’ll pay, and sellers can package their services into clear offerings. This model works well for tasks with predictable scope, like logo design, voiceovers, or article writing.

   The platform takes a flat 20% commission from every transaction, which is higher than what experienced Upwork users pay but simpler to calculate. The real challenge with Fiverr is standing out in an extremely crowded marketplace where many sellers compete on price alone. The platform’s search algorithm heavily favors sellers with strong reviews and fast response times, creating a tough barrier for newcomers.

   Fiverr Pro was introduced to separate premium sellers from budget options, which helps professionals command higher rates. However, getting accepted into Pro requires an application process. For many freelancers, Fiverr works best as a supplementary income source rather than a primary platform, especially if your services don’t fit neatly into packageable gigs.

4. Freelancer.com

   Freelancer.com operates on a contest model alongside traditional project bidding, setting it apart from most competitors. Clients can post a project as a contest where multiple freelancers submit work, and only the winner gets paid. This approach gives buyers more options but creates speculative work for sellers.

   The platform charges various fees depending on membership level. Free accounts face higher commission rates and limits on monthly bids, while paid memberships reduce fees and increase bidding capacity. This tiered system means your profitability depends partly on how much you invest upfront in membership costs.

   Freelancer.com attracts a global user base, which increases opportunity but also intensifies price competition. Many projects receive dozens of bids from freelancers in countries with lower living costs, making it difficult for those in expensive regions to compete on price alone. The platform works better for specialists who can differentiate on expertise rather than cost, though the contest model remains controversial among freelancers who object to working without guaranteed payment.

5. Toptal

   Toptal positions itself at the opposite end of the spectrum from budget platforms, accepting only the top 3% of applicants through a rigorous screening process. This exclusivity is both its greatest strength and its primary limitation. If you pass the vetting process, you gain access to high-paying clients and premium projects without competing against hundreds of other bidders.

   The screening includes skills tests, live interviews, and test projects, which takes weeks to complete. Many qualified freelancers don’t make it through, which can be discouraging. However, those who do join benefit from Toptal’s reputation, which pre-sells your expertise to clients willing to pay premium rates.

   Toptal handles much of the client acquisition and administrative work, allowing you to focus on delivery. The trade-off is less control over client relationships and project selection compared to open marketplaces. Toptal works best for senior-level developers, designers, and finance professionals who can meet the high bar and prefer curated opportunities over high-volume bidding.

6. Guru

   Guru differentiates itself with flexible payment options, including hourly, fixed-price, task-based, and recurring payments. This versatility lets freelancers and clients structure agreements in whatever way makes sense for the specific project. The WorkRoom feature provides integrated collaboration tools, reducing the need for external communication platforms.

   The fee structure uses a tiered membership model. Basic members pay around 9% commission, while paid memberships reduce this percentage and add features like increased bids and priority support. This creates a more predictable cost structure than platforms with variable fees, though you need to calculate whether the membership cost justifies the commission savings based on your project volume.

   Guru’s user base sits smaller than Upwork or Freelancer but larger than highly specialized platforms. This middle ground means moderate competition and a decent flow of projects without the overwhelming volume that makes it hard to stand out. The platform works well for freelancers who value flexibility in payment structures and prefer built-in collaboration tools over juggling multiple external apps.

7. PeoplePerHour

   PeoplePerHour combines project-based work with pre-packaged service offerings called Hourlies, similar to Fiverr’s gig model but with more flexibility. This hybrid approach lets you respond to custom project requests while also selling standardized services. The platform focuses primarily on the European market, though it accepts freelancers and clients globally.

   Commission rates start at 20% and decrease as you complete more projects, dropping to 3.5% after you earn significant revenue through the platform. This graduated structure rewards active users but front-loads costs for newcomers. The platform also uses a credit system for proposals, limiting how many projects you can bid on without purchasing additional credits.

   The European focus means you’ll encounter clients in similar time zones if you’re based in that region, simplifying communication. However, this geographic concentration also limits the total market size compared to truly global platforms. PeoplePerHour works best for freelancers targeting European clients or those who want a middle ground between open bidding and packaged services.

8. 99designs

   99designs specializes exclusively in design work, covering logos, websites, packaging, and other visual projects. This narrow focus creates a concentrated marketplace where every client arrives specifically looking for design services. The platform operates primarily on a contest basis, where designers submit work and clients choose a winner.

   The contest model generates controversy because multiple designers invest time with only one receiving payment. However, 99designs also offers direct hiring for designers who build strong portfolios and reputations on the platform. The commission structure takes approximately 40% from contest winnings and a lower percentage from direct projects, making it one of the more expensive platforms for freelancers.

   The benefit of 99designs is access to clients who understand they’re hiring designers and have budgets allocated specifically for visual work. You won’t waste time on clients shopping for the absolute lowest price or those who don’t value design expertise. The platform works best for designers willing to participate in contests initially to build reputation, then transition to direct clients. If you object philosophically to spec work, 99designs probably isn’t the right fit.

9. SimplyHired

   SimplyHired functions more as a job aggregator than a traditional freelance marketplace, pulling listings from across the web into one searchable database. This approach gives you access to opportunities posted on company websites, other job boards, and freelance platforms without visiting each site individually.

   The trade-off is that SimplyHired doesn’t facilitate transactions or provide protection mechanisms like escrow. When you apply through SimplyHired, you’re redirected to the original posting location, where that platform’s rules and fees apply. This means no consistent fee structure or unified application process.

   SimplyHired works best as a supplement to other platforms rather than a primary source. The aggregation model helps you cast a wider net and find opportunities you might otherwise miss, but you’ll need accounts on various platforms to actually apply and complete work. Think of it as a search tool that broadens your reach rather than a complete freelance solution. The lack of community features or integrated payment systems means you’re essentially on your own once you find a listing.

10. Envato Studio

    Envato Studio focuses on creative services with a curated marketplace approach. Unlike open platforms where anyone can create a profile, Envato hand-picks service providers, maintaining quality control that benefits both sellers and buyers. This selective process means fewer competitors but also requires approval to join.

    The platform charges a 50% commission, which is among the highest in the industry. This steep fee is partially offset by the curated nature reducing competition and the Envato brand bringing in clients willing to pay for quality. However, you need to charge rates high enough that keeping half still provides adequate income.

    Envato Studio works best for established creatives who can command premium prices and value a smaller, quality-focused marketplace over high-volume platforms. The connection to Envato’s other properties, including their massive digital asset marketplace, creates cross-promotion opportunities. If you’re just starting out or need high project volume to sustain your income, the 50% commission makes this platform economically challenging compared to alternatives.

11. DesignCrowd

    DesignCrowd operates primarily on a crowdsourcing contest model where clients post design needs and receive submissions from multiple designers. This structure closely resembles 99designs but with a slightly different user base and geographic focus, particularly strong in Australia and Asia-Pacific regions.

    The contest model creates the same concerns about spec work that apply to similar platforms, with many designers investing time but only one receiving payment. DesignCrowd takes approximately 15% to 20% commission from contest winnings, which is lower than some competitors but still applied to work that required competing against dozens of other submissions.

    The platform offers a direct hire option for designers who establish strong reputations, though most activity centers on contests. DesignCrowd attracts small business clients and startups looking for affordable design work, which means lower average project values compared to enterprise-focused platforms. The trade-off is less competition from agencies and established design firms. This platform makes sense for designers building portfolios, those in Asia-Pacific time zones, or anyone comfortable with the contest model who wants an alternative to 99designs.

Choosing the right freelance platform means understanding not just what each offers, but what you give up in return. Upwork provides volume but charges high fees and requires constant bidding. Fiverr offers simplicity but intense competition. Specialized platforms like Toptal and Legiit reduce competition but serve narrower markets. No single platform dominates across all criteria, which is why many successful freelancers maintain profiles on multiple sites. Start with the platform that best matches your priorities, whether that’s fee structure, market size, or specialization. Test it thoroughly, track your actual earnings after fees, and adjust your strategy based on real results rather than marketing promises.