Cloud · head to head
AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs FaunaDB

FaunaDB
Databases
Document-relational database whose hosted service closed in 2025 and whose core is now unmaintained Apache 2.0 code.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: AWS (Amazon Web Services) data transfer in is free and data transfer out is charged, which is the standard source of unexpected bills; FaunaDB the hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.
- They diverge on capability: AWS (Amazon Web Services) covers EC2 - Virtual Servers, FaunaDB covers Document-relational model.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which AWS (Amazon Web Services) and FaunaDB actually diverge.
| Attribute | AWS (Amazon Web Services) | FaunaDB |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | usage-based | freemium |
| Platforms | Web, Api, Cli, Mobile | Web |
| Category | Cloud | Databases |
| Founded | 2006 | 2012 |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- EC2 - Virtual Servers
- S3 - Object Storage
- RDS - Managed Database
- Lambda - Serverless Computing
- CloudFront - CDN
- VPC - Virtual Network
- IAM - Access Management
- CloudWatch - Monitoring
Only in FaunaDB
- Document-relational model
- FQL v10
- Distributed ACID transactions
- HTTPS access
- User-defined functions
- Attribute-based access control
- Document history
- Event streaming
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Web hostingnot FaunaDB
- Data storagenot FaunaDB
- Machine learningnot FaunaDB
- Big data analyticsnot FaunaDB
- Application developmentnot FaunaDB
FaunaDB
- Keeping an existing Fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and fundednot AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Extracting historical data from a Fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted APInot AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Studying a production implementation of deterministic distributed transactions, since the full server source is now readable under Apache 2.0not AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Forking the engine deliberately, where an organisation has JVM and distributed-systems staff and wants a document-relational store it fully controlsnot AWS (Amazon Web Services)
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Data transfer in is free and data transfer out is charged, which is the standard source of unexpected bills
- Discounts require one or three year Savings Plan commitments rather than being automatic
- Every service is priced separately, so a working architecture has no single published cost
- The free tier is a promotional allowance rather than an ongoing free plan
FaunaDB
- The hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.
- The open-sourced repository has had no substantive activity since May 2025 and the drivers were frozen alongside it, so you inherit responsibility for security patches in a Scala distributed database that almost nobody else is running.
- FQL has no wire or dialect compatibility with anything else, so migrating off is a rewrite of every query, index and access rule in the application rather than a data export.
- No BI tool, ORM or CDC connector speaks FQL, so reporting and analytics always required exporting the data first, and that export tooling is now also unmaintained.
- The community was small before the shutdown and has dispersed since, so operational answers, tuning advice and people who have run a Fauna cluster in anger are all scarce when something breaks.
Pricing, plan by plan
AWS (Amazon Web Services)
Free- AWS Free TierFree
- EC2 750 hours/month
- 5GB S3 storage
- 20GB data transfer
- Pay-As-You-GoFree
- No upfront payment
- No long-term commitments
- Pay only for what you use
FaunaDB
Free- FreeFree
- 100K read ops
- 50K write ops
- 1GB storage
- Pro$25/month
- Pay per use
- Priority support
- Advanced features
Which should you pick?
Choose AWS (Amazon Web Services) if
- You need ec2 - virtual servers.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Api, Cli, Mobile.
- You also want s3 - object storage.
Choose FaunaDB if
- You need document-relational model.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want fql v10.
Questions people ask
- Is AWS (Amazon Web Services) or FaunaDB better?
- Neither clearly leads. AWS (Amazon Web Services) starts at Free and FaunaDB at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, AWS (Amazon Web Services) or FaunaDB?
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) starts at Free and FaunaDB at Free.
- Does AWS (Amazon Web Services) or FaunaDB run on more platforms?
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) runs on Web, Api, Cli, Mobile. FaunaDB runs on Web.
- Can I use AWS (Amazon Web Services) for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is AWS (Amazon Web Services) best used for?
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) is most often used for web hosting, data storage, machine learning, big data analytics. Of those, web hosting and data storage are not what FaunaDB is typically brought in for.
- What can AWS (Amazon Web Services) do that FaunaDB cannot?
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) covers EC2 - Virtual Servers, S3 - Object Storage, RDS - Managed Database, Lambda - Serverless Computing. FaunaDB covers Document-relational model, FQL v10, Distributed ACID transactions, HTTPS access.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
AWS (Amazon Web Services): What are AWS's payment options and pricing models?
AWS offers four pricing approaches: pay-as-you-go (you pay only for what you use), flat-rate plans combining multiple services into one monthly price without overages, Savings Plans offering discounts on compute and machine learning with 1- or 3-year commitments, and volume-based tiered pricing where costs decrease as usage increases.
SourceFaunaDB: Can I still sign up for Fauna as a service?
No. Fauna Inc. wound down the hosted service in 2025 and the company website is no longer serving. The only way to run Fauna now is to build and operate the open-sourced server yourself.
AWS (Amazon Web Services): Are there contracts, termination fees, or commitments required for AWS?
No long-term contracts are required for AWS services. No termination fees apply once you stop using the service. Savings Plans provide optional 1- or 3-year commitments with discounted hourly rates, but you can revert to pay-as-you-go pricing anytime.
SourceFaunaDB: What licence is the open-sourced code under?
Apache 2.0, with the copyright held by a FaunaDB Foundation. That is a permissive OSI licence with no competing-use clause, so you may run it, modify it and even offer it as a service.
AWS (Amazon Web Services): Does AWS offer a free tier?
AWS provides a free tier that offers hands-on experience with AWS products at no charge. The free tier allows new customers to try eligible services before committing to paid usage.
SourceFaunaDB: Is the open source version the same software that ran the cloud?
It is the core database engine. The control plane, billing, dashboard and multi-tenant operational tooling that made it a service are not part of the release, so you are running the engine, not the product.
AWS (Amazon Web Services): How do I estimate my AWS costs?
AWS provides the AWS Pricing Calculator and Cost Explorer tool to estimate costs for single or multiple services. AWS also offers cost optimization recommendations, performance reporting, and budget alerts to help track and control spending.
SourceFaunaDB: What should I migrate to?
There is no drop-in target. Teams that valued the document model with relationships usually land on Postgres with JSONB, and teams that valued the serverless HTTP access pattern usually land on DynamoDB or a managed Postgres with an HTTP driver. Either way the query layer is rewritten.
FaunaDB: How hard is it to self-host?
It builds as a fat JAR and runs as a multi-node JVM cluster. There is an OPERATING.md, but no supported packaging, no operator, no upstream releases and no support contract, so budget for a distributed-systems engineer, not a container.
Related pages
More on AWS (Amazon Web Services)
Other head to heads
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Google Cloud Platform
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Microsoft Azure
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Oracle Cloud
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Vultr
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Wasabi
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Linode
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Hetzner Cloud
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Neon
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Scaleway
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Akamai
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs OVHcloud
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs DigitalOcean
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Fireworks AI
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Heroku
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Vault
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Beam Cloud
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Caddy
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Cerebrium
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Amazon Aurora
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs PostgreSQL
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Airtable
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Cockroach Labs
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs BigQuery
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs CouchDB
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs CosmosDB
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs ArangoDB
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Dgraph
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs DynamoDB
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Google Cloud SQL
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Apache Pinot
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Amazon RDS
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Apache Pulsar
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Cassandra
- AWS (Amazon Web Services) vs Amazon Redshift
- FaunaDB vs Google Cloud Platform
- FaunaDB vs Microsoft Azure
- FaunaDB vs Oracle Cloud
- FaunaDB vs Vultr
- FaunaDB vs Wasabi
- FaunaDB vs Linode
- FaunaDB vs Hetzner Cloud
- FaunaDB vs Neon
- FaunaDB vs Scaleway
- FaunaDB vs Akamai
- FaunaDB vs OVHcloud
- FaunaDB vs DigitalOcean
- FaunaDB vs Fireworks AI
- FaunaDB vs Heroku
- FaunaDB vs Vault
- FaunaDB vs Beam Cloud
- FaunaDB vs Caddy
- FaunaDB vs Cerebrium
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Aurora
- FaunaDB vs PostgreSQL
- FaunaDB vs Airtable
- FaunaDB vs Cockroach Labs
- FaunaDB vs BigQuery
- FaunaDB vs CouchDB
- FaunaDB vs CosmosDB
- FaunaDB vs ArangoDB
- FaunaDB vs Dgraph
- FaunaDB vs DynamoDB
- FaunaDB vs Google Cloud SQL
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pinot
- FaunaDB vs Amazon RDS
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pulsar
- FaunaDB vs Cassandra
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Redshift

