PocketBase vs Supabase: Battle of the Backends
PocketBase and Supabase solve a similar problem — giving developers a ready-made backend. But they do it so differently that a comparison is inevitable.
Architecture
PocketBase — a single Go binary, SQLite inside. Starts in a second, consumes minimal resources. Zero dependencies. Ideal for a single server.
Supabase — a platform built on PostgreSQL with a stack of services: Auth, Storage, Realtime, Edge Functions, vector search. Requires Docker or a cloud account. Scales horizontally.
Database
The main difference: SQLite vs PostgreSQL. PocketBase with SQLite is good for applications with dozens of concurrent users. Supabase on PostgreSQL handles thousands of concurrent connections.
Authentication
- PocketBase: email/password, OAuth2 (Google, GitHub, Apple, and more), built-in
- Supabase: email/password, OAuth, SAML, phone auth, custom providers via GoTrue
Supabase’s authentication is noticeably richer.
Realtime
Both support real-time updates. PocketBase uses Server-Sent Events (SSE), Supabase uses WebSocket with Postgres Changes. Supabase’s system is more mature and reliable.
Deployment
PocketBase: upload the binary to a VPS, run it. Done.
Supabase: docker-compose with 10+ services, or Supabase Cloud.
Self-Hosting Cost
PocketBase: VPS at $5-10/month. Supabase self-hosted: server from $20/month (due to PostgreSQL requirements + many services).
When to Choose What
PocketBase — MVPs, prototypes, side projects, small production applications, admin panels.
Supabase — products with thousands of users, complex authentication, analytics, projects that will grow.
Verdict
PocketBase is the starter backend. Supabase is the backend to grow into. Choose based on the scale of your ambitions.