Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Backstage vs VerneMQ

Backstage logo

Backstage

Developer Tools

Open source internal developer portal framework created and open sourced by Spotify

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
VerneMQ logo

VerneMQ

Databases

Erlang MQTT broker whose source is Apache 2.0 but whose official binaries need a paid subscription

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Backstage backstage is a framework rather than a product: there is no supported turnkey install, so getting to a usable portal means a TypeScript and React project your team owns, hosts and upgrades forever.; VerneMQ the official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • They diverge on capability: Backstage covers Software catalogue, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Backstage and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where Backstage and VerneMQ differ
AttributeBackstageVerneMQ
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
PlatformsWeb, Self-hosted, Linux, Docker, KubernetesLinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
CategoryDeveloper ToolsDatabases

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 Backstage

  • Software catalogue
  • Software templates
  • TechDocs
  • Plugin architecture
  • Kubernetes plugin
  • Search
  • Entity ownership model
  • Auth provider integrations

Only in VerneMQ

  • Erlang/OTP clustering
  • MQTT 5.0 support
  • Plugin system
  • Backpressure handling
  • Bridge support
  • Metrics export
  • MQTT over WebSockets
  • Pluggable auth backends

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Backstage

  • An engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morningnot VerneMQ
  • A platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, CI and security defaults already wired innot VerneMQ
  • A company consolidating scattered READMEs and Confluence pages into docs that live beside the code and cannot silently rot unnoticednot VerneMQ
  • A regulated business that needs an auditable register of every running service, its owner and its data classificationnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

  • An industrial operator that wants an MQTT broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not usenot Backstage
  • A team building from source to stay strictly under Apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglementnot Backstage
  • A deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in Lua or over a webhooknot Backstage
  • An organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small European company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licencesnot Backstage

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Backstage

  • Backstage is a framework rather than a product: there is no supported turnkey install, so getting to a usable portal means a TypeScript and React project your team owns, hosts and upgrades forever.
  • Upstream releases move quickly and plugin APIs have broken across major versions, so a customised deployment accumulates upgrade debt and teams routinely fall months behind on versions they cannot cheaply catch up on.
  • The catalogue is only as good as the YAML descriptors engineers remember to write; without enforcement the register drifts out of date, and a developer portal nobody trusts is abandoned faster than one that never existed.
  • Community plugin quality varies sharply, with many unmaintained or pinned to old core versions, so the plugin that made the business case may be the one blocking your next upgrade.
  • Spotify Portal, the packaged commercial route, publishes no price at all and is quoted as a custom annual subscription, so the only cost you can actually forecast up front is the self-hosted one, which is the option with the largest hidden staffing bill.

VerneMQ

  • The official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • Octavo Labs is a very small company, so support depth, response times and the bus factor on the codebase are materially thinner than at HiveMQ or EMQ.
  • There is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service.
  • Operating an Erlang cluster requires runtime knowledge that most teams do not have and will use for nothing else in their stack.
  • There is no vendor-managed cloud offering, so every deployment is self-operated with the infrastructure and on-call cost that implies.

Pricing, plan by plan

Backstage

Free
  • Backstage (open source)Free
    • Apache 2.0 licence
    • Software catalogue, templates, TechDocs and search
    • Full plugin ecosystem
  • Spotify Portal for Backstage$undefined/year
    • Packaged commercial distribution from Spotify
    • Spotify premium plugins including Soundcheck and Insights
    • Simplified setup and managed upgrade path

VerneMQ

Free
  • Source buildFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed source from GitHub
    • Full clustering and plugin capability
    • You compile and package it yourself
  • Binary packages and Docker images$undefined/year
    • Covered by the VerneMQ EULA, not Apache 2.0
    • Yearly usage subscription expected for commercial use
    • Official builds and Docker images
  • Commercial support$undefined/year
    • Evaluation, customisation and operations assistance
    • Custom development
    • Long-term maintenance agreements

Which should you pick?

Choose Backstage if

  • You need software catalogue.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Self-hosted, Linux, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want software templates.
Backstage review

Choose VerneMQ if

  • You need erlang/otp clustering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
  • You also want mqtt 5.0 support.
VerneMQ review

Questions people ask

Is Backstage or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. Backstage starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Backstage or VerneMQ?
Backstage starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does Backstage or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
Backstage runs on Web, Self-hosted, Linux, Docker, Kubernetes. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use Backstage for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Backstage best used for?
Backstage is most often used for an engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morning, a platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, ci and security defaults already wired in, a company consolidating scattered readmes and confluence pages into docs that live beside the code and cannot silently rot unnoticed, a regulated business that needs an auditable register of every running service, its owner and its data classification. Of those, an engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morning and a platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, ci and security defaults already wired in are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can Backstage do that VerneMQ cannot?
Backstage covers Software catalogue, Software templates, TechDocs, Plugin architecture. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Backstage: Is Backstage free?

The project is Apache 2.0 with no licence fee. The real cost is engineering time; teams commonly dedicate one to two engineers permanently to running it.

VerneMQ: Is VerneMQ free?

The source is Apache 2.0 and free. The official binary packages and Docker images are covered by a separate EULA that expects a yearly fee for commercial use.

Backstage: Do I need to write code to use it?

Yes. Configuring and extending a Backstage application is a TypeScript and React project. This is the single most common misjudgement buyers make.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

Yes. Octavo Labs AG in Zurich continues to publish 2.x releases, most recently in 2026.

Backstage: What is Spotify Portal for Backstage?

A commercial distribution from Spotify with premium plugins and support, generally available since October 2025 and sold as a quoted annual subscription with no published price.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

No. Every deployment is self-hosted, with commercial support available from Octavo Labs.

Backstage: Who owns the project?

Spotify created and open sourced it; it is now a CNCF project, so the upstream roadmap is not solely Spotify controlled.

VerneMQ: How does it compare to EMQX?

Narrower in features and without a rule engine, but with a simpler licence story for source builds after EMQX moved to BSL.

Share

Related pages

More on Backstage

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads