Inngest vs Supabase Functions
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Inngest and Supabase Functions.
Inngest Event-driven functions with automatic retries | Supabase Functions Deno Edge Functions close to your Postgres data | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 4.9 (360 reviews)✓ | 4.5 (372 reviews) |
| Pricing model | freemium | freemium |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Best for | Full-stack developers adding reliable background jobs and event-driven workflows to their Next.js or Node apps | Supabase developers who want to run TypeScript serverless logic close to their PostgreSQL database |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tieropen sourceapi access | free tierapi access |
| Visit Inngest → | Visit Supabase Functions → | |
Inngest
Pros
- + Zero infrastructure setup
- + Automatic retries with backoff
- + Works with any framework or language
Cons
- - Usage-based pricing at scale
- - Developer tool only
Supabase Functions
Pros
- + Low latency access to Supabase DB
- + 500K free invocations/month
- + Deno TypeScript native
Cons
- - Deno differences from Node.js
- - Supabase ecosystem dependency
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.