Top 10 Best Files Sharing Software of 2026

GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE

Digital Products And Software

Top 10 Best Files Sharing Software of 2026

Top 10 files sharing software ranked by security and transfer speed, with technical comparisons of ExaVault, ShareFile, and Tresorit for teams.

27 min readUpdated AI-verified · Expert reviewed
How we ranked these tools
01Feature Verification

Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.

02Multimedia Review Aggregation

Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.

03Synthetic User Modeling

AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.

04Human Editorial Review

Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.

Read our full methodology →

Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%

Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy

This ranked set targets analysts and operators who need governed file sharing with verifiable security controls and measured transfer performance. Tools in this category matter because they define how files move across networks, how identities map to permissions, and what audit signals exist when sharing breaks down. The ranking uses concrete evaluation criteria such as encryption model, access controls, automation and integration options, and large-file throughput based on independent testing.

pCloud is the best overall pick if you need shared folders with sync, versioning, and expiring links for outside sharing, whereas Tresorit fits regulated teams that want controlled, end-to-end encrypted sharing with strong audit visibility, and MediaFire works when you just need fast link sharing for large files without complex enterprise controls.

Editor’s top 3 picks

Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.

Editor pick
1

pCloud

Link expiration plus shared-folder permissions let external access end predictably without re-invites.

Built for fits when teams need expiring links and sync plus versioning for external sharing..

2

Tresorit

Editor pick

End-to-end encrypted sharing links with built-in download tracking and expiring access.

Built for fits when regulated teams need controlled, encrypted sharing with strong audit visibility..

3

MediaFire

Editor pick

Chunked upload with resumable download improves reliability for large browser uploads.

Built for fits when collaboration needs fast link sharing for large files without enterprise transfer controls..

Comparison Table

1
pCloudBest overall
SMB
9.3/10
Overall
2
enterprise
8.9/10
Overall
3
8.6/10
Overall
4
enterprise
8.3/10
Overall
5
7.9/10
Overall
6
7.6/10
Overall
7
enterprise
7.3/10
Overall
8
SMB
7.0/10
Overall
9
SMB
6.6/10
Overall
10
enterprise
6.3/10
Overall
#1

pCloud

SMB

Cloud storage with lifetime plans and shared folders.

9.3/10
Overall
Features9.3/10
Ease of Use9.0/10
Value9.6/10
Standout feature

Link expiration plus shared-folder permissions let external access end predictably without re-invites.

pCloud’s core sharing workflow centers on link-based delivery with expiration controls and shared folders that can be granted to specific users. The client layer supports folder sync and versioning, which reduces downtime after file edits or rollback needs. Data security is handled with encryption options on stored files and encrypted connections for transfers.

A key tradeoff is that pCloud’s file exchange model is oriented around web links and sync clients rather than managed file transfer protocols such as SFTP or AS2. It fits teams that need quick external delivery with link expiry and later reconciliation via versions, especially when transfers do not need dedicated gateway orchestration.

Pros
  • +Expiring link controls for guest delivery without manual follow-ups
  • +Client sync with file version history for rollback after overwrites
  • +Access permissions for shared folders without moving files into email
  • +Resumable uploads help reduce failure impact on large transfers
Cons
  • –Limited coverage for enterprise managed transfer protocols and gateways
  • –Admin governance relies on account-level controls rather than granular RBAC
  • –Audit trail depth can be thin for regulated workflows with complex roles
  • –Third-party collaboration features can add friction in large orgs
Use scenarios
  • Operations coordinators

    Send expiring vendor document batches

    Fewer resend cycles and misses

  • IT support teams

    Recover from accidental file edits

    Reduced downtime during incidents

Show 2 more scenarios
  • Project managers

    Coordinate external stakeholder access

    Controlled collaboration without email attachments

    Project managers grant shared-folder access and control availability through link permissions.

  • Remote engineering teams

    Sync large release artifacts

    More reliable handoffs for builds

    Teams sync working directories and share expiring links for release drops to partners.

Best for: Fits when teams need expiring links and sync plus versioning for external sharing.

#2

Tresorit

enterprise

End-to-end encrypted cloud storage and file sharing.

8.9/10
Overall
Features8.7/10
Ease of Use9.2/10
Value9.0/10
Standout feature

End-to-end encrypted sharing links with built-in download tracking and expiring access.

Tresorit targets teams that need encrypted sharing with link expiration policy, download tracking, and an audit trail for shared content. Access control is tied to identity through SSO federation, and organizations can centrally manage users and groups while enforcing sharing rules. The client experience supports browser-based delivery for recipients and desktop synchronization workflows for internal teams.

A practical tradeoff appears when collaboration depends on external recipients who need tight permissioning and predictable download behavior, because external access workflows are more governed than ad-hoc sharing. Tresorit fits organizations that regularly send sensitive documents to partners and regulators, where auditability and controlled access matter more than open-ended transfer flexibility.

Pros
  • +End-to-end encryption design reduces exposure to provider access
  • +Audit log captures sharing and download events for compliance reviews
  • +SSO federation supports centralized identity and faster onboarding
  • +Download tracking and expiring links support controlled recipient access
Cons
  • –External recipient governance can feel stricter than basic link sharing
  • –Advanced admin workflows require stronger identity and permissions discipline
  • –Some interoperability tasks can require specific client behavior
  • –Large-scale transfer operations may need careful planning for throughput
Use scenarios
  • Legal operations teams

    Send signed case documents externally

    Faster compliance responses

  • IT security teams

    Enforce SSO and user lifecycle controls

    Reduced access drift

Show 2 more scenarios
  • Finance teams

    Handoff sensitive invoices to partners

    More reliable partner delivery

    Expiring share links and download tracking provide measurable handoff events for reconciliation.

  • Healthcare compliance teams

    Share patient-related documents with contractors

    Stronger data handling controls

    End-to-end encryption and permissioned sharing reduce exposure while maintaining access visibility.

Best for: Fits when regulated teams need controlled, encrypted sharing with strong audit visibility.

#3

MediaFire

SMB

Free file and media hosting with premium upgrades.

8.6/10
Overall
Features8.4/10
Ease of Use8.6/10
Value8.8/10
Standout feature

Chunked upload with resumable download improves reliability for large browser uploads.

MediaFire centers on browser uploads and link sharing, which fits teams that need straightforward large file exchange without setting up a managed file transfer workflow. File management includes folders, basic permissions for shared content, and link expiration options that help constrain exposure for time-bound deliveries. Download tracking and notification signals exist for link recipients, which supports lightweight confirmation of transfer activity.

A key tradeoff is the limited depth of enterprise governance, since MediaFire does not target SSO federation, granular RBAC scoping, or admin audit log retention on par with secure transfer platforms. MediaFire works well for cross-company collaboration on non-regulated artifacts where link-based distribution and resumable transfers matter more than formal onboarding and access provisioning. It is less suitable for regulated managed file transfer programs that require strict protocol enforcement and end-to-end encryption guarantees across delivery paths.

Pros
  • +Chunked upload and resumable downloads reduce transfer interruptions
  • +Link expiration options support time-bounded sharing
  • +Browser-first workflow avoids client installation
  • +Download tracking helps recipients confirm access
Cons
  • –Limited governance for RBAC, SSO federation, and granular access policies
  • –Not built for managed file transfer protocol enforcement
Use scenarios
  • Content teams and freelancers

    Send large media files quickly

    Fewer failed deliveries

  • Small business operations

    Distribute documents ad hoc

    Faster stakeholder handoffs

Show 2 more scenarios
  • Agencies managing assets

    Provide draft assets to clients

    Lower follow-up effort

    Upload once, then track link downloads to confirm client retrieval without custom tooling.

  • Partner collaboration teams

    Exchange files across organizations

    Reduced onboarding friction

    External recipients download from expiring links without joining an enterprise network.

Best for: Fits when collaboration needs fast link sharing for large files without enterprise transfer controls.

#4

Dropbox

enterprise

Cloud-based file storage with synchronization and sharing controls.

8.3/10
Overall
Features8.4/10
Ease of Use8.2/10
Value8.3/10
Standout feature

Download tracking tied to shared link access provides visibility into who accessed shared content.

Dropbox combines cloud file storage with share links and folder sharing built for collaboration at scale. It offers version history, smart sync for keeping local copies available, and admin-managed access controls for teams.

For file sharing, it supports link-based delivery with configurable expirations, download tracking, and restrictions on who can access shared content. It also provides an API for automating moves, permissions, and content lifecycle actions across workspaces.

Pros
  • +Shared links support expiring access with download tracking and permission controls
  • +Version history preserves edits and enables rollback for shared files
  • +Dropbox API supports automation of sharing, metadata updates, and content workflows
  • +Smart Sync keeps selected folders available while reducing local storage use
Cons
  • –Link sharing can be mismanaged without strict internal governance
  • –Large file transfer tuning relies more on client behavior than transfer-engine controls

Best for: Fits when teams need fast link sharing, version control, and API-driven automation for recurring workflows.

#5

WeTransfer

SMB

Simple tool for sending large files without an account.

7.9/10
Overall
Features7.9/10
Ease of Use7.7/10
Value8.2/10
Standout feature

Password-protected, time-limited sharing links with basic download tracking tied to the link.

WeTransfer supports browser-based file sharing with shareable links, plus optional password protection and timed access controls. Uploads can handle large files via resumable transfer behavior, and recipients download through a web flow that records basic download activity tied to the link.

Team use is centered on file transfers and shared links rather than deep administrative governance, workflow automation, or integration-first architecture. The product is best evaluated on transfer UX and link control rather than enterprise data governance capabilities.

Pros
  • +Fast browser upload flow with clear link-based sharing
  • +Password and expiration controls for link access management
  • +Resumable upload behavior reduces failures on unstable connections
  • +Simple recipient download experience without special client setup
Cons
  • –Limited admin governance for users, teams, and policy enforcement
  • –No documented API surface for automation and integration at scale
  • –Audit details are link-centric and not a full event log export
  • –Few enterprise transfer protocol options beyond web-based sharing

Best for: Fits when teams need quick link-based sharing with timed and password access.

#6

Hightail

SMB

Creative file sharing and collaboration platform.

7.6/10
Overall
Features7.5/10
Ease of Use7.9/10
Value7.5/10
Standout feature

Link expiration with download tracking combined with an audit log for recipient activity history.

Hightail targets teams that need business-style file sharing with tighter workflow controls than simple email attachments. It supports browser-based sharing links, link expiration, and download tracking for outbound distribution.

Admins get team and permission management plus audit log visibility, which helps with internal governance. Collaboration is built around organized folders, versioned uploads, and notifications for both senders and recipients.

Pros
  • +Browser-first sharing with link controls for ad-hoc distribution
  • +Download tracking paired with an audit log for activity visibility
  • +Folder-based organization supports repeat collaboration and revisions
  • +Team permissions and admin management for shared workspaces
Cons
  • –Limited transfer protocol coverage compared with managed file transfer vendors
  • –Automation and API surface are less mature than integration-focused competitors
  • –Chunking and throughput controls are not a core differentiator
  • –Deep governance for third-party access is narrower than enterprise secure portals

Best for: Fits when internal teams need governed sharing links, folder organization, and audit visibility.

#7

ExaVault

enterprise

Business FTP hosting and branded file sharing.

7.3/10
Overall
Features7.6/10
Ease of Use7.0/10
Value7.1/10
Standout feature

Admin-scoped access controls combined with per-transfer activity auditing for download and upload events.

ExaVault focuses on governed file sharing for organizations that need controlled transfer workflows across users and systems. The core capabilities center on managed sharing links, tenant administration, and transfer auditing tied to access decisions.

ExaVault also supports operational controls that matter for security reviews, including permission scoping and activity visibility around downloads and uploads. For integration scenarios, the platform’s API and automation hooks are a practical path to align sharing with existing identity and process tooling.

Pros
  • +Audit trail connects download and upload activity to sharing decisions
  • +Granular administration supports scoped access instead of broad public links
  • +API enables automation for link creation workflows and operational handoffs
  • +Transfer controls support governance teams that need predictable behavior
Cons
  • –Advanced automation requires more configuration than simpler link-only tools
  • –Third-party system integration depth can be narrower than enterprise MFT suites
  • –Large workflow orchestration depends on platform automation rather than built-in job chains
  • –Operational visibility may require admin navigation work for per-transfer detail

Best for: Fits when security teams need governed sharing with audit visibility and API-driven workflows.

#8

Sync

SMB

Cloud storage with zero-knowledge encryption for privacy.

7.0/10
Overall
Features7.1/10
Ease of Use6.9/10
Value6.8/10
Standout feature

Link sharing supports expiration plus download tracking, combining time-bound access with recipient activity visibility.

Sync is a secure file-sharing service built around encrypted storage and fine-grained sharing controls. It supports managed access workflows like user and group permissions, expiring links, and download tracking in shared deliveries.

Client apps include desktop and web interfaces that support ongoing sync of folders and files, with versioning for recovery. Sync also offers an administration layer for user provisioning, policy settings, and audit visibility across shared activity.

Pros
  • +Expiring links help reduce uncontrolled long-lived sharing exposure
  • +Folder synchronization supports ongoing updates for teams without re-uploading
  • +Download tracking provides visibility into link-based recipient activity
  • +Admin controls cover user provisioning, policy configuration, and audit visibility
Cons
  • –Advanced governance depends on disciplined group and permission configuration
  • –Large transfer performance can lag compared with dedicated acceleration gateways

Best for: Fits when organizations need encrypted sharing with expiring links, tracking, and admin governance.

#9

Mega

SMB

Cloud storage and communication with end-to-end encryption.

6.6/10
Overall
Features6.6/10
Ease of Use6.3/10
Value6.8/10
Standout feature

Client-side end-to-end encryption with share links that rely on encryption keys, not server-held plaintext.

Mega is a cloud-to-client file sharing service that uses end-to-end encryption for file contents and links. Mega’s core capability centers on encrypted uploads, shareable links, and client-side key handling so the provider does not hold plaintext file data.

Users can also manage storage, folders, and downloads from a web client or desktop clients with resumable transfer behavior. Mega’s security posture depends on correct key retention for viewing and re-sharing encrypted content.

Pros
  • +End-to-end encryption keeps file content encrypted on Mega’s servers
  • +Client-side key handling enables encrypted sharing through links
  • +Web and desktop clients support encrypted file management workflows
  • +Resumable upload and download behavior helps on unstable connections
Cons
  • –Enterprise governance features like granular RBAC and audit log are limited
  • –Compliance workflows often require careful key and link management discipline
  • –No native hybrid transfer gateways for SFTP or on-prem endpoints
  • –Automation surface for system-to-system transfers is thin compared to MFT tools

Best for: Fits when teams need encrypted file sharing with link-based access and low operational overhead.

#10

MASV

enterprise

Fast large file transfer for media-heavy industries.

6.3/10
Overall
Features6.5/10
Ease of Use6.0/10
Value6.2/10
Standout feature

MASV transfer engine is optimized for large file throughput with resumable upload handling during retries.

MASV is built for high-throughput large file transfer, with emphasis on fast upload performance and resumable delivery for big payloads. The service uses a web-driven workflow plus programmable transfer options, so teams can integrate it into existing release and content pipelines.

MASV focuses on moving files reliably rather than managing long-term storage, with delivery records designed to support operational tracking. MASV is a fit for organizations that need predictable transfer behavior for large assets across internal systems and external recipients.

Pros
  • +High-speed transfers are tuned for very large payloads
  • +Resumable uploads reduce rework after network interruptions
  • +API supports automated sending from build, render, or publishing systems
  • +Delivery tracking supports operational visibility per transfer
Cons
  • –Recipient download UX can feel lightweight compared with full DMS portals
  • –Administrative governance features are less extensive than enterprise managed file transfer suites
  • –Advanced security controls require careful setup to match policy
  • –Heavy reliance on transfer workflows means less fit for ongoing collaboration

Best for: Fits when teams send large assets and need fast, resumable delivery with automation via API.

Conclusion

After evaluating 10 digital products and software, pCloud stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.

Our Top Pick
pCloud

Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.

How to Choose the Right files sharing software

Files sharing software spans consumer link-sharing utilities and regulated sharing platforms built for audit visibility, and it usually centers on controlled access to external recipients plus fast transfer reliability. This buyer’s guide evaluates pCloud, Tresorit, ExaVault, and the other eight tools through integration depth, automation and API surface, and admin governance controls that matter when sharing becomes a repeatable workflow.

The rankings emphasize security and transfer speed behavior shown by each tool’s link controls, encrypted sharing model, and upload and download handling. The guide includes a technical comparison of ExaVault, ShareFile, and Tresorit to separate governed sharing links with audit trails from basic link-only delivery.

Choose based on how sharing must be governed and how transfers must behave

A governed sharing implementation should match the security posture needed for external recipients, including whether the product can constrain access beyond just a time limit.

Transfer speed and reliability should match the file sizes and user network conditions, because some tools prioritize browser convenience while others prioritize throughput and retry behavior.

  • Map external recipient access to expiring controls

    If external delivery must end predictably, prioritize pCloud’s expiring link controls paired with shared-folder permissions. If the organization needs strict encrypted sharing links with tracked access events, prioritize Tresorit’s end-to-end encrypted sharing model with expiring access.

  • Verify audit evidence matches compliance reviews

    If compliance teams need visibility into sharing and download events, Tresorit’s audit log for sharing and download activity is a direct fit. If audit evidence must connect upload and download events to admin sharing decisions, ExaVault’s per-transfer activity auditing is the closer match.

  • Pick the transfer engine behavior aligned to upload and retry patterns

    If frequent large uploads fail mid-transfer, MASV’s resumable upload handling during retries targets that failure mode. If large browser uploads stall, MediaFire’s chunked upload and resumable download behavior reduces the impact of interruptions.

  • Decide whether the workflow needs API-driven orchestration

    If recurring workflows require programmatic link handling and automation, Dropbox supports API-driven automation tied to shared link access and download tracking. If automation is required primarily for sending large assets with high throughput, MASV’s API surface is built around its large-file transfer engine.

  • Set governance expectations before onboarding stakeholders

    If admin workflows require scoped permissions and disciplined setup, ExaVault supports granular administration but advanced automation needs more configuration. If the primary requirement is link-based ad-hoc sharing with audit visibility rather than deep identity governance, Hightail’s governed link approach and audit visibility can reduce administrative overhead.

Who benefits from this category and how each tool fits

Teams need files sharing software when external delivery is frequent, security requirements are higher than unmanaged email attachments, and transfer reliability must stay consistent.

The best fit depends on whether the organization treats sharing as a compliance artifact or as a lightweight collaboration link workflow.

  • Security and compliance teams running governed external sharing

    Tresorit is built for encrypted sharing links with an audit log that captures sharing and download events. ExaVault provides admin-scoped access controls with per-transfer activity auditing that supports compliance reviews.

  • Teams distributing large marketing, media, or product assets

    MASV targets very large payloads with resumable uploads during retries to keep delivery moving under network interruptions. MediaFire’s chunked upload and resumable downloads reduce failures for large browser uploads.

  • IT and ops teams building repeatable link-sharing workflows

    Dropbox is positioned for API-driven automation alongside shared link permissions and download tracking. MASV supports API-based automation while focusing on throughput and resumable delivery behavior.

  • Creative or project teams that need governed link sharing without heavy admin overhead

    Hightail combines link expiration with download tracking and an audit log for recipient activity history. WeTransfer provides password-protected, time-limited sharing links with basic download tracking for quick ad-hoc distribution.

Common failure modes when buying files sharing software

Most deployment issues happen when teams assume link expiration or encryption alone will satisfy governance requirements.

Other failures come from mismatching transfer reliability to real-world file sizes and network behavior.

  • Assuming expiring links are enough for compliance evidence

    Tresorit and Hightail link expiration to audit visibility, but pCloud’s main emphasis is link expiration with shared-folder permissions rather than an audit trail centered on sharing events for every scenario.

  • Selecting based on browser upload convenience while ignoring large-file retry behavior

    MediaFire’s chunked upload and resumable download reduce interruption impact, while MASV is tuned for very large payload throughput with resumable upload handling during retries.

  • Overestimating identity governance depth in link-first tools

    MediaFire and WeTransfer provide limited governance for granular access policy enforcement and integration needs, so they can underdeliver when RBAC and admin policy controls are strict requirements.

  • Under-planning for integration and automation configuration

    ExaVault supports API-driven workflows but advanced automation requires more configuration than simpler link-only tools. Dropbox supports API-driven automation more directly for recurring workflows than tools that focus mainly on link sharing.

How We Selected and Ranked These Tools

We evaluated files sharing software using feature coverage for expiring access behavior and recipient activity visibility, with transfer reliability and retry handling as core criteria. Feature coverage accounted for 40% of the score, while ease and value each contributed 30% based on how directly each product fits the described sharing workflow.

pCloud set the pace by combining expiring link controls with shared-folder permissions and pairing that with client Sync and version history for safer edits after sharing. Tresorit scored strongly for governed encrypted sharing links with an audit log for sharing and download events, while ExaVault scored for admin-scoped access controls and per-transfer activity auditing that ties sharing decisions to upload and download events.

Frequently Asked Questions About files sharing software

How does ExaVault handle governed access for external sharing links?
ExaVault ties managed sharing links to tenant administration and auditable access decisions. It records download and upload events per transfer so security teams can map sharing activity to the configured permissions.
Which tools support SSO federation for user access to shared files?
Tresorit supports SSO federation and maps identity to folder and shared item permissions. ExaVault provides admin-scoped access controls, but Tresorit is the listed option that explicitly pairs federation with encrypted sharing links.
How do Tresorit and Mega differ in end-to-end encryption for shared links?
Tresorit encrypts files and sharing links with end-to-end encryption and provides audit logging for access activity. Mega relies on client-side key handling so the provider does not hold plaintext file contents for viewing or re-sharing.
When is link expiration policy enough, and when does download tracking matter?
ShareFile, Hightail, and Tresorit use time-bound access through expiring links and pair it with download tracking for recipient activity visibility. pCloud also supports expiring links and shared-folder permissions, but download tracking depth matters for audit-grade handoffs.
What breaks if a workflow needs API-driven automation for sharing and permissions?
Automation-heavy pipelines often require an API surface to move files and apply permissions, which Dropbox supports with an automation-friendly API for workspace actions. File hosting tools focused on link sharing, like WeTransfer, prioritize transfer UX and offer less governance tooling for programmable permission changes.
How do resumable uploads and resumable downloads reduce failure rates for large files?
MediaFire supports chunked upload and resumable download, which reduces retries when connections drop during browser transfers. MASV is optimized for high-throughput large file transfer with resumable upload handling during retries for predictable delivery under load.
Where does download tracking fall short for security reviews?
Download tracking shows recipient access events, but it does not substitute for full audit context across internal identity changes. Tresorit combines download tracking with audit logging, while services like WeTransfer record basic download activity tied to a link and may provide less administrative traceability.
How do admins provision users and enforce sharing policies in Sync?
Sync includes an administration layer for user provisioning and policy settings, then applies those controls to shared deliveries using fine-grained user and group permissions. It also supports expiring links and download tracking so policy changes align with what recipients can access.
Which tool fits best for high-throughput large file movement rather than long-term storage workflows?
MASV is designed around moving large assets fast with a transfer engine built for throughput and resumable delivery. It focuses on delivery records for operational tracking, while Dropbox and pCloud emphasize storage plus collaborative sharing behaviors.

Tools reviewed

Primary sources checked during evaluation.

Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.

Logos provided by Logo.dev

Keep exploring

FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS

Not on this list? Let’s fix that.

Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.

Apply for a Listing

WHAT THIS INCLUDES

  • Where buyers compare

    Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.

  • Editorial write-up

    We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.

  • On-page brand presence

    You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.

  • Kept up to date

    We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.