Supabase vs Firebase vs Appwrite: Which Backend Platform Fits Your Team in 2026?

Building on a backend service today means picking not just features, but a cost model and a level of control you’ll live with for years. This guide compares Supabase, Firebase, and Appwrite through two lenses that most teams care about in 2026: cost and long‑term TCO, and control including self‑hosting and data residency. If you’re a startup CTO, a PM prioritizing timelines, a SMB backend engineer, or an indie dev watching your runway, this breakdown is for you.

Here’s the short version: Supabase vs Firebase vs Appwrite isn’t a one‑size‑fits‑all decision. If you need SQL and the option to self‑host, you’ll lean one way. If you want a fully managed stack with deep mobile tooling, you’ll lean another. If predictable quotas and a self‑host path are top priorities, a third path may fit best. Let’s get specific.

Supabase vs Firebase vs Appwrite: the quick decision

We weighted our assessment toward the two “hero” axes:

• Cost & long‑term TCO predictability: free tiers vs usage traps, overage risks, and how bills scale in real life.
• Control & self‑hosting/data residency: ability to self‑host, choose regions, and meet compliance needs.

Secondary factors include data model fit (SQL vs NoSQL), real‑time and edge functions, ecosystem maturity, and migration paths. Key facts link to official documentation, such as the Firestore Enterprise pricing page and locations docs, the Supabase comparison and PrivateLink notes, and Appwrite pricing and self‑hosting references.

Decision matrix at a glance

Supabase: SQL‑centric with a self‑host option and tiered costs

Supabase centers everything around PostgreSQL. That’s compelling if your team values relational schemas, SQL queries, and portability. Its hosted plans emphasize predictable, tiered pricing for database, storage, and compute—without per‑request metering—which can simplify forecasting compared with per‑operation billing models. The provider’s comparison materials describe this model and clearly note that self‑hosting via CLI/Docker is supported for teams that need full control or want to keep data in specific environments, as outlined in the platform’s “Supabase vs Firebase” explainer.

On control and residency, you can deploy projects into specific regions on the managed service and, at the enterprise end, use private connectivity. Regional availability and timelines for private links are documented in the platform’s connectivity guide, which is useful if you’re threading the needle between SaaS convenience and strict network boundaries.

Realtime rides on database change streams with WebSockets, which fits well for collaborative apps that already think in terms of rows and columns. Edge functions cover serverless needs with a familiar developer experience. If you’re coming from Firebase, you can even run parallel authentication during a migration by treating Firebase Auth as a third‑party provider while you move users and sessions.

Who it’s best for: Teams that prefer SQL and want a credible path to self‑hosting or tighter network controls, plus a cost structure that favors steady, tiered growth. Who might look elsewhere: Apps designed around document stores from day one, or teams that prefer Google’s managed ecosystem end‑to‑end.

References:

• Pricing model and self‑hosting posture (comparison explainer): Supabase vs Firebase
• Enterprise connectivity and regional timelines: PrivateLink documentation
• Parallel auth during migration: Use Firebase Auth as a third‑party provider

Firebase: fully managed with deep SDKs, but no self‑hosting

Firebase remains a go‑to for teams that want fast shipping on mobile and web, with a mature SDK footprint and real‑time features built in. It’s fully managed—there’s no self‑host path—so your control over deployment is exercised through data location choices and Google Cloud organization policies.

On the cost side, Firestore’s Enterprise edition introduced per‑unit pricing for realtime updates, along with detailed metering for storage, backups, and PITR. That makes it possible to model costs precisely, but it also means bills can fluctuate based on access patterns. Design matters: chatty listeners, broad queries, and hot paths can move the needle quickly. The documentation shows daily free units for realtime updates and then per‑million rates by region, so it’s worth quantifying your expected update volume during planning.

Control and residency are handled by selecting regional or multi‑regional locations at creation time—important because you can’t change a database’s location later without a migration. The platform’s storage policies are also evolving; a notable change requires pay‑as‑you‑go (Blaze) for default Cloud Storage buckets by early February 2026, which can affect projects that previously ran on free tiers.

Who it’s best for: Teams that want a fully managed platform with tight integration across analytics, messaging, storage, and functions, especially for mobile. Who might look elsewhere: Organizations that must self‑host or need hard guarantees on data residency beyond region selection and cloud policy tools.

References:

• Firestore Enterprise pricing (2026): Realtime update units and storage/backup rates
• Firestore locations: Regional vs multi‑regional choices and immutability
• Cloud Storage policy change (effective early 2026): Blaze requirement for default buckets

Appwrite: predictable Cloud quotas with a first‑class self‑host path

Appwrite takes an API‑first approach with a Cloud offering and an emphasis on being easy to self‑host. For many teams, that mix hits a sweet spot: predictable Cloud quotas when you want low‑ops, and a clear “bring your own infrastructure” path when you need compliance control or cost ceilings.

On costs, Appwrite’s updates through late 2025 outline included reads/writes per month, bandwidth in terabytes, compute GB‑hours, and clear overage rates on paid plans. The published materials indicate, for example, that Cloud plans include substantial bandwidth and compute quotas with transparent overage pricing. A separate update describes specific quotas for database reads and writes and per‑100k operation overage rates. As always, treat numbers as indicative and confirm on the live pricing page before you model a budget.

Control is a core theme here. The platform maintains self‑hosting guides using Docker and one‑click deploys, and its Cloud regions are documented with migration notes if you need to move a project between regions. Realtime spans databases, storage, and functions; functions are budgeted with GB‑hour quotas, which makes monthly spend easier to predict for steady workloads.

Who it’s best for: Teams that want the option to self‑host from day one or to shift from Cloud to self‑host later, and that favor predictable quotas over per‑request billing. Who might look elsewhere: Teams that require the broadest possible managed ecosystem and first‑party integrations commonly associated with hyperscale clouds.

References:

• Cloud pricing update (2025): Plan quotas and overages
• Database reads/writes quotas (2025): Operation inclusions and overage rates
• Self‑hosting docs: Docker and deployment options
• Regions and migrations: Region list and change‑region guide

A practical migration checklist from Firebase

If you’re moving away from Firebase, plan on a phased migration with parallel services and clear rollback points. Here’s a high‑level checklist:

1. Map data models and access patterns: document Firestore collections/queries or Realtime Database trees, and decide on your target schema or collections.
2. Run parallel authentication: connect your new backend and treat Firebase Auth as a third‑party provider to bridge users and sessions during the cutover.
3. Stage your data export/import: export Firestore/Realtime Database data and Cloud Storage objects, then import into the new database and storage, validating indexes and permissions.
4. Rebuild real‑time listeners and security rules: replicate server rules and client listeners in the new stack; test hot paths under load.
5. Move functions/edge logic: port serverless code, watch for cold‑start behavior and per‑invocation limits, and set up observability.
6. Flip feature flags and run canaries: route a small percentage of traffic to the new backend; monitor latency, error rates, and cost deltas.
7. Plan and rehearse rollback: document the exact steps and data diffs needed to revert if KPIs degrade.

For step 2, see the official guide on using Firebase Auth as a third‑party provider during migrations; it’s a reliable way to keep users logged in while you transition.

TCO scenarios: where bills tend to spike (or stay tame)

Hobby/prototype (0–$50/month). A small project with light auth and modest reads/writes may sit comfortably on free tiers or the first paid tier. With Firebase, watch for chatty listeners that convert into realtime update units. With Supabase, most of the bill is tied to modest database/storage footprints. With Appwrite Cloud, included reads/writes and bandwidth often cover small projects; self‑hosting here can be cheaper if you already have spare infrastructure.

SMB launch (up to $500–$3k/month). At this stage, data egress and real‑time traffic matter. In Firebase, aggressive real‑time usage and broad queries can move costs quickly; you can rein it in with query hygiene and by scoping listeners. Supabase tends to scale via instance size and storage; heavy write workloads may push you to bigger compute tiers. Appwrite Cloud makes overages transparent for reads/writes, bandwidth, and compute; predictability is good, but ensure you budget for bandwidth if you serve large files.

Scale‑up (>$10k/month). At sustained scale, all three can work—design discipline and cost controls decide your fate. Firebase can benefit from Committed Use Discounts and careful listener design. Supabase’s costs concentrate in database/storage/compute; for extreme workloads, you may consider horizontal strategies, read replicas, or partitioning. Appwrite Cloud remains predictable by quota, while self‑hosting shifts spend to your cloud bill and SRE cost. The winning move is to regularly run cost drills: estimate your top five cost drivers and set alerts before overages bite.

Alternatives if none of the above fit

• AWS Amplify: tightly integrated with AWS services; great when you’re already all‑in on AWS.
• Hasura on Postgres: GraphQL over SQL with strong control; best when you want a query‑centric backend.
• Realm with MongoDB Atlas: mobile‑first sync and document model; natural choice for document‑heavy apps.
• PocketBase or Convex: lightweight options for prototypes and indie projects, with straightforward DX.

FAQ

Which platform is cheapest for real‑time apps?

It depends on your traffic shape. Firebase’s Firestore Enterprise edition prices realtime update units explicitly, which is great for modeling but can spike if listeners are broad or chatty. Supabase’s tiered approach concentrates costs in database/storage/compute rather than per‑request, which can be calmer for steady, predictable workloads. Appwrite Cloud allocates reads/writes and bandwidth quotas up front; bursty workloads may hit overages, but you’ll at least know the rates in advance.

Can I self‑host any of these?

Firebase is fully managed with no self‑host option. Supabase documents self‑hosting via CLI/Docker, so you can run it on your infrastructure if needed. Appwrite is self‑hostable from the start, and its Cloud product provides a hosted alternative when you don’t want to operate it yourself.

How do I handle data residency and compliance?

With Firebase, you pick Firestore and Realtime Database locations at creation time—regional or multi‑regional—and that choice can’t be changed later without a migration. Supabase’s hosted service deploys to regions you select and provides private connectivity features for enterprises; it also supports self‑hosting if you need to run on your own infrastructure. Appwrite offers both Cloud regions and self‑hosting, giving you flexibility to meet data residency needs.

How hard is it to migrate from Firebase?

Plan to run auth in parallel, export/import data, and gradually shift traffic using feature flags. The biggest risks are permission mismatches, query behavior differences, and under‑estimating real‑time costs in the target platform. A staged rollout with monitoring and a documented rollback plan reduces risk substantially.

Sources and further reading

• Supabase pricing model & self‑hosting posture (comparison explainer): Supabase vs Firebase
• Supabase enterprise connectivity and region timelines: PrivateLink documentation
• Firebase Firestore Enterprise pricing (2026): Realtime update units and storage/backup rates
• Firestore locations: Regional vs multi‑regional choices and immutability
• Firebase Cloud Storage policy change (effective early 2026): Blaze requirement for default buckets
• Appwrite Cloud pricing update (2025): Plan quotas and overages
• Appwrite database reads/writes quotas (2025): Operation inclusions and overage rates
• Appwrite self‑hosting documentation: Docker and deployment options
• Appwrite regions and migrations: Region list and change‑region guide

Scenario‑based recommendations and next steps

• If cost predictability and a self‑host path are non‑negotiable, start trials with Supabase and Appwrite. Validate your schema and real‑time patterns, then model costs using storage, compute, and the reads/writes quotas you’ll actually consume.
• If speed to market and a fully managed developer experience matter most—especially for mobile—pilot Firebase with realistic listener patterns and stress tests. Keep an eye on realtime update units and storage/egress costs.
• Not sure yet? Run a one‑week spike on two of the three using a representative feature (auth + real‑time list + file upload). Instrument requests, egress, and function invocations; then compare the first‑month bill projections. Here’s the deal: nothing beats your own data for forecasting.

Whichever platform you choose, write down your top five cost drivers and set alerts for them now. Think of it as a seatbelt—you hope you won’t need it, but you’ll be glad it’s there.

Recommended reading

• SQL Optimization Course
• SQL optimization knowledge
• Database industry knowledge

What is SQLFlash?

SQLFlash is your AI-powered SQL Optimization Partner.

Based on AI models, we accurately identify SQL performance bottlenecks and optimize query performance, freeing you from the cumbersome SQL tuning process so you can fully focus on developing and implementing business logic.

How to use SQLFlash in a database?

• SQLFlash + MySQL

• SQLFlash + PostgreSQL