DevVersus

Supabase vs Turso(2026)

Supabase is better for teams that need full postgres with sql. Turso is the stronger choice if ultra-low latency at edge. Supabase is freemium (from $25/month) and Turso is freemium (from $29/month).

Full feature breakdown, pricing details, and pros & cons below.

By Bikram NathLast updated

Affiliate disclosure: Some “Visit” links on this page are affiliate links. We may earn a commission if you sign up — at no extra cost to you. It does not affect our rankings or editorial coverage. Learn more.

Supabase logo

Supabase

freemium

Supabase is an open source Firebase alternative providing a Postgres database, Auth, realtime, storage, and edge functions.

Starting at $25/month

Visit Supabase
Turso logo

Turso

freemium

Turso is a distributed SQLite database built for the edge, powered by libSQL.

Starting at $29/month

Visit Turso

How Do Supabase and Turso Compare on Features?

FeatureSupabaseTurso
Pricing modelfreemiumfreemium
Starting price$25/month$29/month
PostgreSQL
Authentication
Realtime
Storage
Edge Functions
Auto-generated APIs
Distributed SQLite
Edge-first
libSQL fork
Multi-tenancy
Embedded replicas

Supabase Pros and Cons vs Turso

S

Supabase

+Full Postgres with SQL
+Built-in auth and storage
+Open source
+Great free tier
Free tier pauses after 1 week inactive
Self-hosting is complex
Edge functions limited
T

Turso

+Ultra-low latency at edge
+SQLite simplicity
+Generous free tier
+Multi-DB per account
No complex joins at scale
SQLite limitations
Newer ecosystem

Deep dive: Supabase

When to choose Supabase

Choose Supabase if you're building modern applications that need real-time features (live collaboration, chat, notifications), PostgreSQL SQL queries, and built-in auth without Firebase's vendor lock-in. It's ideal for startups and solo devs—the free tier is genuinely useful: 500MB database, 1GB file storage, and 50K monthly auth events. The open-source architecture means you can self-host if Supabase ever becomes too expensive or unreliable. Supabase is the WRONG choice for static sites, simple blogs, or projects that don't need a database—you're overpaying for a data engine. The free tier has gotchas: projects pause after 1 week of inactivity, so it's not suitable for production apps unless you pay. Edge functions are limited (Node.js-only, limited dependencies), so if you need Python or heavy compute, look at Vercel or Lambda. Real-time subscriptions are great for user-facing features but add complexity and can get expensive at scale ($4/month per 1M realtime events).

Real-world use case

A founder built a real-time collaborative whiteboard app using Supabase's free tier: PostgreSQL for drawing data, auth for user management, and realtime subscriptions for live syncing. Development took 3 weeks because Supabase's JavaScript client made auth + database + realtime easy. Launch day: 200 beta users, freemium model (5 boards per user, pay $5/month for unlimited). Month 1 costs: $0 (free tier). Month 2: traffic exceeded free tier limits (database grew to 600MB); upgraded to Pro ($25/month). At 500 paid users ($5/month each), revenue was $2,500/month; Supabase cost was $25/month. The pricing math worked beautifully. If she'd used Firebase, vendor lock-in would've been higher, and Postgres SQL flexibility would've been lost. The real-time feature (10K concurrent users syncing) cost her an extra $200/month in realtime events by month 6, but that was still <1% of revenue.

Hidden gotchas

Supabase's free tier pauses projects after 7 days of inactivity—projects are frozen, databases reset, and cold starts hurt. Many developers are shocked to find their free project gone after a vacation. Pro tier pricing ($25/month) includes 500K realtime events; overages are $0.04 per 100K events—a popular app hits $500+ in surprise overages. Database backups on free tier are limited to the last 7 days; Pro tier gets 30 days. Restore operations aren't self-service; they require support tickets. Self-hosting Supabase is documented but complex: you need Docker, Kubernetes, and 2+ hours of setup. The authentication defaults are opinionated—if you need SAML, LDAP, or non-standard OAuth flows, you'll hit limitations. Edge functions (Deno-based) have strict limits: 10 second timeout, no native PostgreSQL connection pooling, and dependency issues (some npm packages won't work). Row-level security (RLS) is powerful but has a learning curve; misconfigured policies silently fail, returning empty rows instead of errors. Realtime subscriptions aren't designed for high-frequency updates (>100Hz); you'll hit performance cliffs. Rate limiting for APIs isn't clearly documented; high-concurrency apps might get throttled unexpectedly. Cold starts on edge functions are 1-2 seconds, much slower than Vercel.

Pricing breakdown

Supabase's free plan includes 500 MB database, 1 GB file storage, 50 MB bandwidth, and 500K Edge Function invocations. The Pro plan at $25/mo adds 8 GB database, 100 GB file storage, and 250 GB bandwidth. Beyond included limits: database is $0.125/GB, bandwidth is $0.09/GB, storage is $0.021/GB. At moderate scale (50K MAU, 20 GB database), expect $40-80/mo. The advantage: Postgres + Auth + Storage + Edge Functions bundled at roughly 60% the cost of running separate services. The cost trap: database compute is tied to your plan tier — CPU-heavy queries on the free/Pro plans hit performance ceilings.

Deep dive: Turso

When to choose Turso

Choose Turso if you're building edge applications that need database reads at the edge with sub-10ms latency, or if you want SQLite's simplicity without managing deployment. Single-region workloads with <10GB of data fit perfectly. The free tier is generous ($0 for 8GB + 1M API requests/month), making it ideal for side projects, internal tools, and MVPs. SQLite's single-writer model works fine if you don't have concurrent writes from multiple regions. Turso is wrong if you need ACID transactions across multiple tables (SQLite has limited multi-table transaction support), you have thousands of concurrent writers, your queries involve complex joins, or you need advanced indexing like JSONB. Also wrong if you're already invested in SQL Server, Cassandra, or a different database ecosystem—SQLite is simple but completely different. Not suitable for teams expecting SQL migrations tooling on par with Postgres or those needing a dedicated database team. High-concurrency write-heavy applications will hit SQLite's single-writer bottleneck.

Real-world use case

A solo developer built an analytics dashboard for startup portfolios using Turso, deployed globally on Vercel edge functions with SQLite replicated to 5 regions. Each user's dashboard queries Turso from the nearest edge location. Load time: 40ms (10ms database, 30ms rendering). Cost: $0 (free tier). Real tradeoff: they initially tried Neon from each edge location but hit connection limits—Vercel edge functions don't support persistent connections, so each request was a new connection attempt. With Turso's HTTP API, each edge function makes a stateless request to the nearest replica with zero connection overhead. They chose Turso over Firebase because Firebase's realtime sync would've overkilled the use case; they just needed fast reads. When they added a second analytics dashboard writing to the same SQLite database, they discovered SQLite's single-writer model queued writes. On busy days, writes would queue for 100ms+, requiring them to implement a backend write queue. The lesson: edge reads are great, but writes still bottleneck at the primary.

Hidden gotchas

SQLite's single-writer model is not obvious from marketing. Multiple concurrent writes queue behind each other—if one write takes 500ms, the next write waits. This bites every developer eventually and forces you to architect write queues or batch writes in your application layer. Replication across regions is read-only on replicas—you can only write to the primary. Writes must round-trip to the primary region, negating the latency benefit for write-heavy applications. This limitation contradicts the 'edge database' marketing pitch. Their 'libSQL' dialect adds Postgres-like features incompletely and underdocumented. Trying to use features that exist in Postgres but not libSQL leads to silent failures or cryptic errors. Row limits on the free tier (8GB total) are split across all your databases—if you create 5 databases, you're splitting 8GB five ways. This isn't clear upfront. The HTTP API adds latency vs. TCP connections; if you're not on the edge, you're actually slower than direct SQLite. Complex joins become very slow at scale; SQLite was never designed for analytical queries on large datasets. You'll discover this in production, not development.

Pricing breakdown

Turso's free Starter plan includes 9 GB total storage, 500 databases, and 25 billion row reads/mo — extremely generous for SQLite-based apps. The Scaler plan at $29/mo adds 24 GB storage, 10,000 databases, and 100 billion row reads. Enterprise is custom. The per-database model means you can give each user their own SQLite database at near-zero marginal cost. Egress is free. The pricing advantage over PlanetScale is significant for read-heavy workloads. Write volume is the constraint: the Starter plan includes 50M row writes/mo, Scaler includes 200M.

Should You Use Supabase or Turso?

For most teams, Supabase is the better default: it offers full postgres with sql and is freemium (from $25/month). Choose Turso instead if ultra-low latency at edge matters more than free tier pauses after 1 week inactive. There is no universal winner — the right pick depends on your budget, team size, and whether you value full postgres with sql or ultra-low latency at edge more.

Choose Supabase if…

  • Full Postgres with SQL
  • Built-in auth and storage
  • Open source

Choose Turso if…

  • Ultra-low latency at edge
  • SQLite simplicity
  • Generous free tier

More Databases Comparisons