We use provider pages as the source of truth.
Pricing, plan names, free plan availability, and trial details are checked against official provider pages before being used in ProPicked scores. Vendor relationships do not change rankings, scores, or recommendations.
Provider Pricing Facts
Provider pricing facts: Fauna offers a free plan; Supabase offers a free plan.
Source and Freshness Note
Source and freshness note: pricing, free-plan, and feature signals are compared from public provider data and updated comparison records. Last checked May 2026.
Fauna vs Supabase: Honest Comparison (2026)
Fauna
Distributed serverless database with native GraphQL and strong consistency guarantees
Supabase
Open-source Firebase alternative with Postgres database
We may earn a commission through links on this page · Editorial policy
Quick Verdict:
Supabase wins with 9.0/10 vs 7.8/10. Choose Fauna for overall value. Choose Supabase for better value for money.
Supabase wins this comparison with a score of 9.0/10 vs 7.8/10. Both offer free plans. Fauna stands out for true globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives, while Supabase excels at built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power. This is confirmed by our feature analysis where Supabase also scores higher (7.0/10).
| Feature | Fauna | Supabase |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating | 7.8/10 | 9.0/10 |
| Ease of Use | 7.0/10 | 9.2/10 |
| Features | 8.5/10 | 8.7/10 |
| Value for Money | 7.5/10 | 9.2/10 |
| Customer Support | 7.5/10 | 9.2/10 |
| Free Plan | Yes ✓ | Yes ✓ |
| Starting Price | $0.01/mo | $25/mo |
| Feature Score | 6.0/10 | 7.0/10 |
| Top Strength | True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives | Built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power |
| Biggest Weakness | Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins | Free tier database pauses after inactivity |
| Best For | Fauna is best for developers building globally distributed applications that require strong consistency guarantees. It suits teams that need ACID transactions across regions without managing distributed database infrastructure. | Full-stack developers needing a backend quickly |
| Winner | Supabase (9.0/10) | |
What is Fauna?
Distributed serverless database with native GraphQL and strong consistency guaranteesFauna is a distributed, serverless document-relational database that provides globally consistent transactions without the operational overhead of traditional databases. The database uses the Calvin protocol for strict serializability across regions, ensuring data consistency even in multi-region deployments. Fauna Query Language (FQL) is a TypeScript-native query language that supports complex queries, joins, aggregations, and nested transactions. The database also offers a native GraphQL API that auto-generates resolvers from schema definitions. Fauna supports document collections with typed schemas, relationships between collections, computed fields, indexes for efficient querying, and user-defined functions for server-side logic.
- +True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- +Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- +Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
- •Fauna is best for developers building globally distributed applications that require strong consistency guarantees. It suits teams that need ACID transactions across regions without managing distributed database infrastructure.
What is Supabase?
Open-source Firebase alternative with Postgres databaseSupabase is an open-source Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS) built on PostgreSQL that provides database hosting, authentication, instant APIs, edge functions, real-time subscriptions, and file storage. It offers a Firebase-like developer experience with the power and reliability of PostgreSQL, supporting self-hosting and a generous free tier.
- +Built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power
- +Generous free tier for development and small projects
- +Open-source with self-hosting option
- •Full-stack developers needing a backend quickly
- •Startups building MVPs with limited backend resources
- •Teams wanting an open-source Firebase alternative
Fauna vs Supabase: Key Differences
Fauna vs Supabase: Quick Verdict
Decision Summary
Who wins in each scenario? A quick look at how Fauna and Supabase compare across different buyer needs.
Scores 9.0/10 vs 7.8/10
Scores 9.2/10 on value vs 7.5/10
Ease of use: 9.2/10 vs 7.0/10
Features + support avg: 8.9/10 vs 8.0/10
Free plan available + 9.2/10 value
Both offer free plans
Choose Fauna if you need...
- ✓True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- ✓Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- ✓Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
- ✓Lower starting price ($0.01/mo vs $25/mo)
- !True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- !Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
Choose Supabase if you need...
- ✓Built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power
- ✓Generous free tier for development and small projects
- ✓Open-source with self-hosting option
- !Free tier database pauses after inactivity
- !Edge functions ecosystem still maturing
Our Take: Fauna vs Supabase
There's a clear gap here. Supabase leads at 9.0/10, while Fauna trails at 7.8/10. That said, the lower-rated tool may still be the better choice if its strengths align with your specific needs.
Where they differ: Fauna's biggest strengths are true globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives and document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins. Supabase, on the other hand, shines with built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power and generous free tier for development and small projects. These reflect fundamentally different product priorities.
Both offer free plans, so you can test each one with zero risk before committing. We recommend trying both for a week with real data.
Fauna vs Supabase Score Comparison
| Category | Fauna | Supabase |
|---|---|---|
🏆Overall Score | 7.8 | ▲9.0 |
💫Ease of Use | 7.0 | ▲9.2 |
⚙Features | 8.5 | ▲8.7 |
💰Value for Money | 7.5 | ▲9.2 |
💬Customer Support | 7.5 | ▲9.2 |
Why These Scores? Our Reasoning
- +True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- +Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- +Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
- -True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- -Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- +Built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power
- +Generous free tier for development and small projects
- +Open-source with self-hosting option
- -Free tier database pauses after inactivity
- -Edge functions ecosystem still maturing
Fauna vs Supabase Pros & Cons
+Strengths
- ✓True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- ✓Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- ✓Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
-Weaknesses
- ✗True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- ✗Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- ✗Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
+Strengths
- ✓Built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power
- ✓Generous free tier for development and small projects
- ✓Open-source with self-hosting option
- ✓Instant REST and GraphQL APIs from database schema
-Weaknesses
- ✗Free tier database pauses after inactivity
- ✗Edge functions ecosystem still maturing
- ✗Complex queries may need direct SQL knowledge
Who Should Use Fauna vs Supabase?
Fauna is ideal for
- •Fauna is best for developers building globally distributed applications that require strong consistency guarantees. It suits teams that need ACID transactions across regions without managing distributed database infrastructure.
Supabase is ideal for
- •Full-stack developers needing a backend quickly
- •Startups building MVPs with limited backend resources
- •Teams wanting an open-source Firebase alternative
When NOT to Choose Fauna or Supabase
Knowing when a tool is the wrong fit is just as important as knowing its strengths
Skip Fauna if...
- ✗True globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- ✗Document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- ✗Fully serverless with zero infrastructure management and automatic scaling
Skip Supabase if...
- ✗Free tier database pauses after inactivity
- ✗Edge functions ecosystem still maturing
- ✗Complex queries may need direct SQL knowledge
Fauna vs Supabase Decision Framework
Choose based on what matters most to you
Fauna vs Supabase Pricing
| Pricing Feature | Fauna | Supabase |
|---|---|---|
| Free Plan | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Starting Price | $0.01/mo | $25/mo |
| Free Trial | Not available | Not available |
| Number of Plans | 3 | 4 |
| Value Rating | 7.5/10 | 9.2/10 |
Fauna Plans
- ✓100K read ops/day
- ✓50K write ops/day
- ✓1 GB storage
- ✓5 databases
- ✓Pay per operation
- ✓Unlimited storage
- ✓Unlimited databases
- ✓Priority support
- ✓Dedicated capacity
- ✓SLA guarantees
- ✓SSO/SAML
- ✓Custom regions
Supabase Plans
- ✓500MB database
- ✓50,000 monthly active users
- ✓1GB file storage
- ✓Community support
- ✓8GB database
- ✓100,000 monthly active users
- ✓100GB file storage
- ✓Daily backups
- ✓SOC2 compliance
- ✓Priority support
- ✓Standardized security questionnaire
- ✓28-day log retention
- ✓Custom database size
- ✓Dedicated support engineer
- ✓SLA guarantee
- ✓Custom contracts
What You Get: Plan Feature Comparison
Comparing Fauna's Pro ($0.01/mo) vs Supabase's Pro ($25/mo)
| Feature | Fauna | Supabase |
|---|---|---|
| Pay per operation | ✓ | ✗ |
| Unlimited storage | ✓ | ✗ |
| Unlimited databases | ✓ | ✗ |
| Priority support | ✓ | ✗ |
| 8GB database | ✗ | ✓ |
| 100,000 monthly active users | ✗ | ✓ |
| 100GB file storage | ✗ | ✓ |
| Daily backups | ✗ | ✓ |
Which Should You Choose?
Supabase
Quick Buyer's Guide
Based on our analysis, here's who each tool is best suited for
- ✓Fauna is best for developers building globally distributed applications that require strong consistency guarantees. It suits teams that need ACID transactions across regions without managing distributed database infrastructure.
- ✓Users who need true globally consistent transactions set it apart from eventually consistent alternatives
- ✓Users who need document-relational model combines the flexibility of documents with relational joins
- ✓Teams with tighter budgets ($0.01/mo vs $25/mo)
- ✓Full-stack developers needing a backend quickly
- ✓Startups building MVPs with limited backend resources
- ✓Users who need built on PostgreSQL for reliability and SQL power
Fauna vs Supabase: The Bottom Line
Supabase wins this comparison, but the right pick depends on your priorities.
Bottom line: go with Fauna (7.8/10) if you value solid reliability and good value. Choose Supabase (9/10) if you need top-tier capability and depth. Either way, start with the free tier before upgrading. Fauna at 7.8/10 trails by a meaningful margin, but could still be the right call if it offers capabilities Supabase lacks for your use case.