Notion, Figma, or Frontify: which asset portal to choose?
The question is not 'which platform is the best' but 'which platform aligns with how your team actually works'.
There is no absolutely correct platform, only the platform that matches the team size, type of assets, and maintenance budget. Notion is suitable for small teams needing a quick and low-cost centralized space, Figma is ideal when the focus is on source design files, while specialized portals like Frontify are suitable for larger companies with multiple departments needing permissions and embedded guidelines. Custom-built platforms should only be considered when available options truly hinder operations, not simply for ownership.
- Notion for small teams, where the main assets are documents and guidelines.
- Figma focuses on the source design file; the team is accustomed to Figma.
- A dedicated portal is needed when there are many departments, requiring permissions and a self-service template library.
- Create a custom platform when there are no specific integration requirements and no long-term technical team.
- Buy an expensive platform with many features, but no one on the team uses it.
When a brand starts to have many users of its assets, the inevitable question arises: where to store files so everyone can access the correct file and version without having to ask each time? The short answer is: the platform that you truly open every week is the right platform. Everything else is a factor to narrow down the options.
Distinguish between two layers: file storage and the guidance portal.
Before comparing tools, clarify what you are lacking. A Digital Asset Management (DAM) system organizes, stores, and controls the version of the original files. A brand portal creates a guided experience, informing users how, when, and with whom to use those assets. These two layers are different and cannot replace each other.
The most common mistake Sinh Vũ encounters: companies have all the files but no one knows how to use them correctly because there are no accompanying instructions. Or conversely, there is a beautiful instruction page but the links lead to outdated files. Identifying which team is lacking will significantly shorten the tool selection process.
When to choose which direction
Figma is the natural choice when the primary asset users are the design team and the component library has been established in Figma. Adding non-design team members to Figma to access logos or images can create unnecessary friction, as they must learn an additional tool just to download a file.
Choose a platform based on the biggest pain point of your current workflow, not based on the longest feature list.
Nielsen Norman Group, DesignOps Study Guide
The foundation for custom builds: when truly necessary.
Building custom allows you to control the entire infrastructure and deeply integrate into the internal system. However, the entire maintenance burden falls on your technical team: security updates, feature enhancements, and bug fixes. Maintenance costs often exceed the initial building costs after a few years of operation.
Sinh Vũ only recommends this direction when two conditions are met: there is a need for specific internal infrastructure integration that existing tools cannot meet, and there is a capable technical team for long-term maintenance. If you want to build something custom to own it or because the brand needs 'something unique,' that is not a strong enough reason.
Factors to check before deciding
- The number of people who actually open the gate each week and their level of technological proficiency.
- Type of main assets: source design files, heavy images and videos, or documents and guidelines.
- The necessary level of decentralization: who can access what, and who cannot.
- Annual maintenance budget, not just initial setup costs.
- The ability to export data in an open format when wanting to switch platforms later.
The viewpoint of Sinh Vũ
Sinh Vũ does not assume that pushing clients to a more expensive platform is necessary. In the O2 operating package, the asset portal is flexibly built on Notion, Figma, or a digital asset repository depending on the actual scale of the team, not according to a feature list. The goal is singular: everyone accesses the latest version from a single source, reducing the onboarding time for new team members from weeks to hours.
A single source of truth is more important than any platform name. The platform is a means, not the destination. Prioritize platforms that support open standards and can export data, so you don't lock yourself into a vendor when needs change.
Decision checklist
Topic: Choose an asset portal: Notion, Figma, Frontify, or a custom platform. Sinh Vũ guide, sinhvu.com
Select each item you find appropriate, then print or save as PDF to take with you.
If you have marked most of the signs above, this is the time to discuss in more detail. Sinh Vũ can help you review and propose a direction.
References
Frontify, Brand Portal Guide; Frontify, DAM and Brand Portal Integration; Smint.io, DAM vs Brand Portal; Nielsen Norman Group, DesignOps Study Guide; Sinh Vũ, service profile O2 (internal).
Frequently asked questions
Can I use Notion for free?
Yes, if your team is small and the primary assets are documents, guidelines, and written standards. Problems arise when heavy assets like original images, videos, and print files increase significantly: Notion is not a dedicated digital asset repository, so searching and assigning permissions by file type will be difficult. In that case, it is advisable to separate: Notion retains guidelines, while a dedicated digital asset management (DAM) system stores original files.
Figma already has libraries; is a separate brand portal still needed?
It depends on who needs to use that asset. If the end user is a designer on the team, Figma is sufficient. But if the marketing department, printing partners, or retail points need to access logos, images, or color standards, using Figma means you are asking outsiders to learn an additional tool they do not need. A dedicated brand portal addresses that issue.
Is creating a controlled custom platform better?
More technical control is required, but in return, you must maintain everything yourself: security updates, feature upgrades, and bug fixes. Maintenance costs often exceed initial setup costs after a few years. Sinh Vũ only recommends this approach when there is a requirement for specific internal infrastructure integration and a capable technical team for long-term support.