Databases · head to head
BigQuery vs FaunaDB

BigQuery
Databases
Google Cloud's serverless analytical warehouse, billed either by bytes scanned per query or by reserved compute slots.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -

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: BigQuery on-demand billing charges for bytes read from every column a query references, so an unqualified select or a missing partition filter turns a routine query into a large bill, and the cost is discovered after the fact rather than at review time.; 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: BigQuery covers Serverless compute, FaunaDB covers Document-relational model.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which BigQuery and FaunaDB actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases).
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 BigQuery
- Serverless compute
- Separation of storage and compute
- Two pricing models
- Partitioning and clustering
- Materialised views
- BigQuery ML
- Storage Write API
- BI Engine
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.
BigQuery
- A warehouse for an organisation already on Google Cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same placenot FaunaDB
- Bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster runningnot FaunaDB
- Event and clickstream analytics ingested continuously through the Storage Write API and queried without a load windownot FaunaDB
- Analytics teams with no infrastructure staff, where the absence of anything to tune or patch is worth more than dialect portabilitynot FaunaDB
FaunaDB
- Keeping an existing Fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and fundednot BigQuery
- Extracting historical data from a Fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted APInot BigQuery
- Studying a production implementation of deterministic distributed transactions, since the full server source is now readable under Apache 2.0not BigQuery
- Forking the engine deliberately, where an organisation has JVM and distributed-systems staff and wants a document-relational store it fully controlsnot BigQuery
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
BigQuery
- On-demand billing charges for bytes read from every column a query references, so an unqualified select or a missing partition filter turns a routine query into a large bill, and the cost is discovered after the fact rather than at review time.
- There is no way to join tables that live in different regions, so a data estate split across regions for residency reasons has to be reconciled with copies and the storage and transfer that implies.
- It is not built for point lookups; retrieving a single row has latency measured in hundreds of milliseconds or more, so BigQuery cannot serve an application's read path and always needs a second store in front of it.
- Frequent small mutations run into DML concurrency limits and the cost of rewriting storage blocks, so a workload that updates individual rows continuously behaves badly compared with an append-only design.
- The compute exists only inside Google Cloud, so while tables can be exported, the accumulated GoogleSQL, scheduled queries, authorised views, ML models and IAM structure do not move, and switching warehouses is a rewrite of the analytical layer.
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
BigQuery
Free- Free TierFree
- 1TB queries/month
- 10GB storage/month
- Standard support
- On-demand$6.25/TB
- Pay per query
- Pay per storage
- All features
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 BigQuery if
- You need serverless compute.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Cloud API.
- You also want separation of storage and compute.
Choose FaunaDB if
- You need document-relational model.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want fql v10.
Questions people ask
- Is BigQuery or FaunaDB better?
- Neither clearly leads. BigQuery 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, BigQuery or FaunaDB?
- BigQuery starts at Free and FaunaDB at Free.
- Does BigQuery or FaunaDB run on more platforms?
- BigQuery runs on Web, Cloud API. FaunaDB runs on Web.
- Can I use BigQuery for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is BigQuery best used for?
- BigQuery is most often used for a warehouse for an organisation already on google cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same place, bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster running, event and clickstream analytics ingested continuously through the storage write api and queried without a load window, analytics teams with no infrastructure staff, where the absence of anything to tune or patch is worth more than dialect portability. Of those, a warehouse for an organisation already on google cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same place and bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster running are not what FaunaDB is typically brought in for.
- What can BigQuery do that FaunaDB cannot?
- BigQuery covers Serverless compute, Separation of storage and compute, Two pricing models, Partitioning and clustering. FaunaDB covers Document-relational model, FQL v10, Distributed ACID transactions, HTTPS access.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
BigQuery: How is BigQuery actually billed?
Storage is billed separately from compute. Compute is either on-demand, priced by the bytes a query reads from the referenced columns, or capacity-based, where you reserve autoscaling slots. Most cost surprises come from on-demand queries that scan more than expected.
FaunaDB: 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.
BigQuery: How do I control query cost?
Partition and cluster tables so queries prune data, select only the columns needed, use materialised views for repeated aggregations, and set maximum bytes billed on queries so a runaway scan fails instead of billing.
FaunaDB: 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.
BigQuery: Can I use it without being on Google Cloud?
The service only runs on Google Cloud. BigQuery Omni can query data held in S3 or Azure storage, but the compute is still Google's and the account relationship is still with Google.
FaunaDB: 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.
BigQuery: Is it suitable for serving application queries?
No. Latency for single-row reads is far too high. BigQuery is an analytical warehouse and application read paths need a transactional database or a cache in front of it.
FaunaDB: 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.
BigQuery: When should I move from on-demand to capacity pricing?
When on-demand spend becomes both large and predictable, or when unpredictable spend is a bigger problem than query queueing. The switch trades a variable bill for a fixed one plus contention between workloads.
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
Other head to heads
- BigQuery vs Amazon Redshift
- BigQuery vs Firebolt
- BigQuery vs MotherDuck
- BigQuery vs DuckDB
- BigQuery vs TiDB
- BigQuery vs Apache Druid
- BigQuery vs ClickHouse
- BigQuery vs PlanetScale
- BigQuery vs turbopuffer
- BigQuery vs VerneMQ
- BigQuery vs Vespa
- BigQuery vs Xata
- BigQuery vs YugabyteDB
- BigQuery vs Zilliz
- BigQuery vs Amazon RDS
- BigQuery vs Apache Flink
- BigQuery vs DynamoDB
- BigQuery vs Amazon Aurora
- BigQuery vs PostgreSQL
- BigQuery vs Airtable
- BigQuery vs Cockroach Labs
- BigQuery vs CouchDB
- BigQuery vs CosmosDB
- BigQuery vs ArangoDB
- BigQuery vs Dgraph
- BigQuery vs Google Cloud SQL
- BigQuery vs Apache Pinot
- BigQuery vs Apache Pulsar
- BigQuery vs Cassandra
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Redshift
- FaunaDB vs Firebolt
- FaunaDB vs MotherDuck
- FaunaDB vs DuckDB
- FaunaDB vs TiDB
- FaunaDB vs Apache Druid
- FaunaDB vs ClickHouse
- FaunaDB vs PlanetScale
- FaunaDB vs turbopuffer
- FaunaDB vs VerneMQ
- FaunaDB vs Vespa
- FaunaDB vs Xata
- FaunaDB vs YugabyteDB
- FaunaDB vs Zilliz
- FaunaDB vs Amazon RDS
- FaunaDB vs Apache Flink
- FaunaDB vs DynamoDB
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Aurora
- FaunaDB vs PostgreSQL
- FaunaDB vs Airtable
- FaunaDB vs Cockroach Labs
- FaunaDB vs CouchDB
- FaunaDB vs CosmosDB
- FaunaDB vs ArangoDB
- FaunaDB vs Dgraph
- FaunaDB vs Google Cloud SQL
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pinot
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pulsar
- FaunaDB vs Cassandra
