Quick answer: Pixellot is two costs, not one. There is hardware, reported from around $949 for the portable Air units, and a subscription, reported at roughly $199 per month per team for unlimited basketball (5v5) games, usually with a short free trial of a game or two. Pixellot does not publish a single consolidated price list, and league or school partnerships often change the numbers substantially, so treat these as reported figures rather than list prices.
| Component | Reported 2026 cost |
|---|---|
| Portable camera hardware (Air / Air NXT) | From about $949, one-time |
| Basketball 5v5 subscription | About $199 / month per team, unlimited games |
| Fixed ceiling-mounted installs | Quote only, varies by venue |
| League / association partnerships | Often subsidised, sometimes no cost to the school |
Compiled from public retail listings and third-party pricing summaries on 30 July 2026. Pixellot negotiates directly and through partners, so your quote may differ.
What you are actually buying
Pixellot sells automated capture. The camera records the whole floor at once and the software crops and follows the action, so you get a watchable game video without anyone sitting behind a tripod. For a program that currently has a parent filming from the corner of the bleachers, that is a real upgrade, and the labour it removes is the honest value.
What it does not do is tell you anything about the opponent. It produces footage. Turning footage into a plan is still a person watching it.
Why the partnership route matters more than the list price
A large share of American high schools do not buy Pixellot the way the retail price suggests. The systems are widely deployed through PlayOn and the NFHS Network for livestreaming high school sports, and under some of those agreements schools have received equipment, software, and services at no direct cost as part of the streaming arrangement.
Before you price a unit, find out whether your state association or conference already has an arrangement. Programs have paid four figures for something their league would have installed.
The comparison nobody makes clearly
Capture tools and analysis tools get shopped against each other constantly, and they solve different problems:
- Pixellot, Spiideo, ShotTracker: get the game recorded or measured. Hardware involved.
- Hudl, Hudl Sportscode, Just Play: store, tag, and distribute what you recorded.
- Synergy: a library of already-tagged film, at enterprise prices.
- [HoopBrief](/vs/pixellot): produces the opponent analysis itself, with no film and no hardware, from $9.99 a month.
None of these replaces another cleanly. A program with a camera and no analysis has footage nobody has time to watch. A program with analysis and no camera cannot review its own execution. Buy against your actual bottleneck.
Questions worth asking before you commit
- Is this hardware or a subscription, and for how long? The camera is a one-off; the plan is forever. Budget the second number, not the first.
- What happens to the footage if you stop paying? Ask explicitly. Access to your own archive is the thing programs regret not checking.
- Who is going to watch it? A season of unwatched film costs the same as a season of watched film. This is the question that decides whether capture is worth it at all.
- Does your league already provide it? Ask before you quote.
For where capture sits against everything else you might spend on, see what a high school program should budget for scouting software.