Softwr

Machine Learning · head to head

ClearML vs VerneMQ

ClearML logo

ClearML

Machine Learning

Open-source MLOps platform for experiment tracking and orchestration

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: ClearML broad scope means more to learn and more to run than a focused tracking tool; 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: ClearML covers Experiment tracking, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which ClearML and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where ClearML and VerneMQ differ
AttributeClearMLVerneMQ
Pricing modelOpen-source self-hosted, with paid hosted and enterprise tiersquote
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, Docker, KubernetesLinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
CategoryMachine LearningDatabases

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 ClearML

  • Experiment tracking
  • Remote execution
  • Data versioning
  • Pipelines

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.

ClearML

  • Tracking experiments across a team so results are reproduciblenot VerneMQ
  • Moving training from laptops to shared GPU hardware without repackagingnot VerneMQ
  • Versioning datasets alongside the experiments that consumed themnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

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

Where each one falls short

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

ClearML

  • Broad scope means more to learn and more to run than a focused tracking tool
  • Self-hosting the server is real infrastructure — database, file storage and web server
  • Documentation quality is uneven across the newer parts of the platform
  • Smaller community than the most popular tracking tools, so fewer worked examples exist

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

ClearML

Free
  • Open sourceFree
    • Experiment tracking
    • Pipelines
    • Self-hosted server

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 ClearML if

  • You need experiment tracking.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want remote execution.
ClearML 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 ClearML or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. ClearML 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, ClearML or VerneMQ?
ClearML starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does ClearML or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
ClearML runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use ClearML for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is ClearML best used for?
ClearML is most often used for tracking experiments across a team so results are reproducible, moving training from laptops to shared gpu hardware without repackaging, versioning datasets alongside the experiments that consumed them. Of those, tracking experiments across a team so results are reproducible and moving training from laptops to shared gpu hardware without repackaging are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can ClearML do that VerneMQ cannot?
ClearML covers Experiment tracking, Remote execution, Data versioning, Pipelines. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

ClearML: Is ClearML free?

The open-source version is free and self-hostable. Hosted and enterprise tiers are paid.

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.

ClearML: How much code does tracking require?

Very little — adding a couple of lines to an existing training script captures parameters, metrics and environment automatically.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

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

ClearML: Does ClearML replace MLflow?

It covers MLflow’s tracking and adds orchestration, remote execution and data versioning. Whether that breadth is an advantage or extra weight depends on whether you need the rest.

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 ClearML

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads