Comparison of YouTube, Vimeo, and Streamable Embedded Video Players

How each video player looks different in dimensions of 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:5, and 1.91:1 when embedded

YouTube vs. Streamable vs. Vimeo

Videos look different when you embed them using different video hosting platforms. More specifically, embedded video players treat video dimensions differently, including:

• 16:9 (YouTube Video, Twitter/X Post)
• 9:16 (TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts)
• 1:1 (Instagram Post Square, Facebook Video)
• 4:5 (Instagram Post Portrait)
• 1.91:1 (Linkedin Landscape, Facebook Post)

Below, you can see the differences between YouTube, Vimeo, and Streamable and how their video players appear embedded on a standard Medium page.

For the sake of comparison, I used the same video clip for each size to control variables.

My observations are at the bottom of this post.

Full disclosure: Hopin owns Streamable, and I work at Hopin.

16:9 (YouTube Video, Twitter/X Post)

YouTube:

16:9 video on YouTube’s embedded player

Vimeo:

16:9 video on Vimeo’s embedded player

Streamable:

16:9 video on Streamable’s embedded player

9:16 (TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts)

YouTube:

9:16 video on YouTube’s embedded player

Vimeo:

9:16 video on Vimeo’s embedded player

Streamable:

9:16 video on Streamable’s embedded player

1:1 (Instagram Post Square, Facebook Video)

YouTube:

1:1 square video on YouTube’s embedded player

Vimeo:

1:1 square video on Vimeo’s embedded player

Streamable:

1:1 square video on Streamable’s embedded player

4:5 (Instagram Post Portrait)

YouTube:

4:5 video on YouTube’s embedded player

Vimeo:

4:5 video on Vimeo’s embedded player

Streamable:

4:5 video on Streamable’s embedded player

1.91:1 (Linkedin Landscape, Facebook Post)

YouTube:

Landscape video on YouTube’s embedded player

Vimeo:

Landscape video on Vimeo’s embedded player

Streamable:

Landscape video on Streamable’s embedded player

Observations:

Each video hosting platform has its strengths and weaknesses when it comes to embedding videos. Here are my observations:

YouTube Video Embedding:

• Strengths: It’s free, widely recognized, and reliable. You can also use embedding to rack up views on YouTube if that’s your goal.
• Weaknesses: The call-to-actions, “Watch on YouTube” branding, and ads on pre-roll and post-roll all compete and distract viewers from your video content. Also, because YouTube’s player is only 16:9, it shows empty spaces and black bars for vertical videos.

Vimeo Video Embedding:

• Strengths: No center “Play” button covers the thumbnail image. Vimeo is established in the film community and has a robust platform with lots of customization on paid plans.
• Weaknesses: Distracting buttons overlay the video, Vimeo’s branding, and only two videos are allowed on the free plan so I had to use three separate accounts to create this post (paid plans start at $20/month for 60 videos).

Streamable Video Embedding:

• Strengths: No branding is nice and the minimal player has a professional appearance. Better pricing. Super simple tool in general.
• Weaknesses: Not as well-known. Free plan has unlimited video uploads but each is limited to 10 minutes/250MB in size (however, the next tier up has no limits for only $10/month).

Hope this was helpful — thanks for reading.