Softwr

Cloud · head to head

Caddy vs VerneMQ

Caddy logo

Caddy

Cloud

Web server with automatic HTTPS by default

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: Caddy smaller ecosystem than Nginx, so third-party guides and modules are fewer; 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: Caddy covers Automatic HTTPS, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Caddy and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where Caddy and VerneMQ differ
AttributeCaddyVerneMQ
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, DockerLinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
CategoryCloudDatabases

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 Caddy

  • Automatic HTTPS
  • Caddyfile
  • Reverse proxy
  • Single binary

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.

Caddy

  • Sites and services where expired certificates have caused outages beforenot VerneMQ
  • Small deployments where Nginx configuration is more effort than the problem warrantsnot VerneMQ
  • Reverse proxying internal services with TLS without a certificate workflownot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

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

Where each one falls short

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

Caddy

  • Smaller ecosystem than Nginx, so third-party guides and modules are fewer
  • Adding plugins means rebuilding the binary rather than loading a module
  • Under very high throughput Nginx generally still benchmarks ahead
  • Automatic certificate issuance needs outbound internet access, which complicates air-gapped deployments

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

Caddy

Free
  • CaddyFree
    • Full functionality
    • Commercial use permitted
    • Community support

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 Caddy if

  • You need automatic https.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want caddyfile.
Caddy 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 Caddy or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. Caddy 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, Caddy or VerneMQ?
Caddy starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does Caddy or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
Caddy runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use Caddy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Caddy best used for?
Caddy is most often used for sites and services where expired certificates have caused outages before, small deployments where nginx configuration is more effort than the problem warrants, reverse proxying internal services with tls without a certificate workflow. Of those, sites and services where expired certificates have caused outages before and small deployments where nginx configuration is more effort than the problem warrants are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can Caddy do that VerneMQ cannot?
Caddy covers Automatic HTTPS, Caddyfile, Reverse proxy, Single binary. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Caddy: Is Caddy free?

Yes, open source under the Apache 2.0 licence, free for commercial use.

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.

Caddy: What does automatic HTTPS mean?

Caddy obtains certificates from Let’s Encrypt or ZeroSSL on first request and renews them before expiry, with no cron job or configuration.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

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

Caddy: Caddy or Nginx?

Caddy is dramatically simpler to configure and removes certificate management. Nginx has the larger ecosystem and better peak throughput.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

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

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 Caddy

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads