PocketBase vs Supabase
PocketBase is open-source backend in a single Go file with real-time DB, auth, and file storage, while Supabase is Open-source Firebase alternative with Postgres database, auth, and edge functions. PocketBase is built for developers wanting a single-file go backend, whereas Supabase targets full-stack developers wanting a hosted postgres backend.
At a glance
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Developers wanting a single-file Go backend | Full-stack developers wanting a hosted Postgres backend |
| Starting price | Free | Free |
| Free tier | ✓ | ✓ |
| Open source | ✓ | ✓ |
| Free tier available | ✓ | ✓ |
| Open source | ✓ | ✓ |
| Auth | ✓ | ✓ |
| Edge Functions | — | ✓ |
| Postgres | — | ✓ |
| Real-Time | ✓ | ✓ |
| S3 Storage | ✓ | — |
| Single File | ✓ | — |
PocketBase
Strengths
- Open source and transparent
- Includes Single File as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows
- Fully open-source — you can self-host, audit the code, and avoid vendor lock-in
- The core product is free with no paywalled essentials
Weaknesses
- May lack some advanced features
- Self-hosting is free but requires server maintenance and DevOps knowledge
- Fewer built-in features means you may need additional tools to cover gaps
- Costs can spike unexpectedly during traffic surges if limits aren't configured
Supabase
Strengths
- Open source and transparent
- Includes Postgres as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows
- Fully open-source — you can self-host, audit the code, and avoid vendor lock-in
- Free for 2 projects — generous enough for most small teams to get real work done
Weaknesses
- Free plan exists but key features are locked behind the paid upgrade
- Fewer built-in features means you may need additional tools to cover gaps
- Costs can spike unexpectedly during traffic surges if limits aren't configured
- Community support can be slower than the dedicated support teams at commercial alternatives
The bottom line
Pricing: Both PocketBase and Supabase are free. You can try both without spending a dollar.
Feature gaps: PocketBase offers S3 Storage and Single File that Supabase lacks. Supabase brings Edge Functions and Postgres that PocketBase does not have. Both share Auth and Real-Time.
Team fit: PocketBase is geared toward individual users and small setups, while Supabase is aimed at small teams teams. Pick the one that matches where your team is today and where it is headed — migrating tools later is always painful.
Open source: Both PocketBase and Supabase are open source, so self-hosting and code audits are on the table with either choice.
Where each tool shines: PocketBase's biggest strengths are: open source and transparent. includes single file as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows. Supabase's biggest strengths are: open source and transparent. includes postgres as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows.
Watch out for: With PocketBase, users commonly note that may lack some advanced features. With Supabase, the main complaint is that free plan exists but key features are locked behind the paid upgrade.
Choose PocketBase if...
- Your profile matches its sweet spot: developers wanting a single-file go backend
- You specifically need S3 Storage and Single File
- You care about includes single file as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows
- Your team size fits the individuals profile PocketBase is designed for
Choose Supabase if...
- You need a tool built for full-stack developers wanting a hosted postgres backend
- You specifically need Edge Functions and Postgres
- You care about includes postgres as a core feature, purpose-built for cloud hosting workflows
- Your team size fits the small teams profile Supabase is designed for
- The free tier works for you: free for 2 projects
Looking for more options?
Related comparisons
Stay sharp
price changes, and honest takes — weekly.