The Rise of Open-Source Backend Platforms: Firebase, Supabase, and Appwrite Compared

Something interesting happened in backend development over the past two years. Firebase, once the default choice for startups building their first app, started losing ground to open-source alternatives. Not because Firebase stopped working, but because developers realized they were trading convenience for control.

The shift tells a bigger story about where backend development is heading in 2026.

The Firebase Era (And Why It's Ending)

Firebase solved a real problem. Before it existed, building a backend meant provisioning servers, setting up databases, implementing authentication, and maintaining everything yourself. Firebase made all of that disappear behind a simple SDK.

But that convenience came with strings attached. Your data lives on Google's servers. Your costs scale with their pricing tiers. Your application architecture becomes deeply coupled to their proprietary APIs. And when you outgrow the free tier, the bills can surprise you.

I've seen startups hit $2,000/month Firebase bills within their first year. Not because they were doing anything wrong, but because real-time database sync and cloud functions add up fast when users actually show up.

The Open-Source Backend Revolution

Two platforms emerged to challenge Firebase's dominance: Supabase and Appwrite. Both took different approaches to the same problem.

Supabase positioned itself as "the open-source Firebase alternative" with a twist: instead of a proprietary database, it uses PostgreSQL. This matters more than it sounds. PostgreSQL is battle-tested, incredibly capable, and your team probably already knows it. Supabase adds real-time subscriptions, authentication, storage, and edge functions on top.

Appwrite took a different path. It's designed from scratch as a complete backend platform, not an abstraction layer over existing tools. Authentication, databases, storage, functions, messaging - everything integrated tightly. It runs in Docker containers, making self-hosting genuinely straightforward.

Both are open-source. Both let you self-host. Both eliminate vendor lock-in. But they're not the same.

Head-to-Head: What Actually Matters

The database choice matters most. Firestore is a document database. Great for some use cases, limiting for others. If your data has complex relationships, you'll fight against it constantly. Supabase's PostgreSQL gives you SQL's full power. Appwrite's MariaDB sits somewhere in between.

The Real Cost Comparison

Let's get specific. A mid-sized application with 10,000 monthly active users, basic authentication, 50GB storage, and moderate database operations:

Firebase: ~$150-400/month depending on usage patterns. Real-time listeners and cloud function invocations add up fast.

Supabase Cloud: ~$25-75/month on their Pro plan. More predictable pricing with usage caps.

Appwrite on Elestio: ~$14-29/month for the VM, regardless of usage. Your application scales with your server, not your billing.

Supabase on Elestio: Same deal - flat infrastructure cost, unlimited users.

The self-hosted approach wins on cost when you have consistent, predictable workloads. Firebase wins on pure convenience when you're validating an idea and cost doesn't matter yet.

When to Choose Each One

Choose Firebase if:

• You need to ship an MVP in a weekend
• Your team knows the Google ecosystem
• Vendor lock-in isn't a concern
• Budget is unlimited during validation phase

Choose Supabase if:

• You want PostgreSQL's power with Firebase's developer experience
• Your data has complex relationships
• You might self-host later but want managed hosting now
• You need row-level security built into the database

Choose Appwrite if:

• Self-hosting from day one is non-negotiable
• You want everything integrated in one platform
• Docker is already part of your stack
• You're building multiple applications that share backend infrastructure

Why Self-Hosting Changed the Equation

Three years ago, self-hosting a backend platform meant real operational overhead. Kubernetes configurations, database replication, SSL certificates, backup scripts. It was work.

That changed. Platforms like Elestio now offer one-click deployment of Supabase and Appwrite with managed updates, automated backups, and SSL handled automatically. You get the benefits of self-hosting (data ownership, predictable costs, no vendor lock-in) without the operational burden.

This is why the "Firebase vs alternatives" conversation shifted. The convenience gap closed. Now you're comparing actual features and philosophy, not just "managed vs self-hosted."

The Bigger Trend

What's happening with backend platforms reflects a larger pattern in software: proprietary convenience tools dominated the 2010s, open-source alternatives matured in the 2020s, and now managed open-source is eating both markets.

Developers want the control of open-source with the convenience of SaaS. They're getting it. Firebase still works fine, but it's no longer the obvious default. That's healthy competition.

The winners are the developers who now have real choices. Build on Firebase if it fits. Run Supabase on managed hosting. Self-host Appwrite on your own terms. The backend is no longer a one-size-fits-all decision.

Getting Started

If you're evaluating options, here's my suggestion: spin up both Supabase and Appwrite on a test instance. Build the same simple feature - user authentication with a database write - on each platform. You'll know within an hour which one fits your mental model better.

The good news? Whichever you choose, you're not locked in anymore.

Thanks for reading!