Fly.io vs Porter
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Fly.io and Porter.
Fly.io Deploy apps globally with sub-50ms latency | Porter Kubernetes deployments for teams without DevOps | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 4.2 (191 reviews) | 4.8 (52 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | freemium |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Best for | Latency-sensitive applications — APIs, real-time apps, and globally distributed backends | Growing engineering teams who need Kubernetes scalability but don't have dedicated DevOps resources |
| Specifications (entry plan) | ||
| CPU cores | 1 vCPU | — |
| RAM | 0.3 GB | — |
| Storage | 0 GB | — |
| Bandwidth | 0 TB/mo | — |
| SLA uptime | 99.9% | — |
| Data-center count | 35 | — |
| €/vCPU/mo | €0.00 | — |
| €/GB RAM/mo | €0.00 | — |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ✓ | |
| DDoS protection | ||
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ✓ | |
| Free tier | ✓ | |
| Data-center locations | ||
| Regions | United StatesUnited KingdomGermanyFranceNetherlandsSingapore+5 | — |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tiermanaged optionipv6eu datacenterus datacenterapac datacenterapi accessprivate networking | free tiermanaged optionteam featureskubernetes supportapi access |
| Visit Fly.io → | Visit Porter → | |
Fly.io
Pros
- + 35+ global cities — widest edge deployment network
- + Bare metal performance in a PaaS wrapper
- + Persistent volumes and managed PostgreSQL included
Cons
- - CLI-heavy — less visual than Render
- - Learning curve for networking concepts
- - Documentation occasionally outdated
Porter
Pros
- + Kubernetes power with Heroku simplicity
- + PR preview environments
- + Your own cloud account — data stays with you
Cons
- - Requires AWS/GCP/DO account
- - More setup than Render or Railway
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.