Softwr

Cloud · head to head

containerd vs Soketi

containerd logo

containerd

Cloud

Industry-standard container runtime, and the engine inside Docker

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Soketi logo

Soketi

Developer Tools

Self-hosted, Pusher-compatible WebSockets server with a stalled maintenance record

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: containerd not a developer-facing tool: there is no build command and the CLI is deliberately minimal, so it needs companions like nerdctl or Buildah; Soketi maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • They diverge on capability: containerd covers Full container lifecycle, Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which containerd and Soketi actually diverge.

Attributes where containerd and Soketi differ
AttributecontainerdSoketi
PlatformsLinux, WindowsLinux, macOS, Windows
CategoryCloudDeveloper Tools

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), 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 containerd

  • Full container lifecycle
  • CRI support
  • OCI compliant
  • Snapshotter plugins
  • Namespaces
  • Stable API

Only in Soketi

  • Pusher protocol compatibility
  • Presence and private channels
  • Horizontal scaling
  • App management backends
  • Webhooks
  • Prometheus metrics

What people use each for

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

containerd

  • Running the container runtime under a Kubernetes cluster after the Docker shim removalnot Soketi
  • Building a platform or PaaS that needs to execute containersnot Soketi
  • Reducing the moving parts on nodes that only ever run Kubernetes workloadsnot Soketi
  • Embedding container execution inside another productnot Soketi

Soketi

  • A Laravel application that already uses Echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime providernot containerd
  • Realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasonsnot containerd
  • A local or CI environment that needs a Pusher-compatible server without hitting a paid accountnot containerd
  • A high-connection-count application where hosted per-connection pricing has become the largest line in the infrastructure billnot containerd

Where each one falls short

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

containerd

  • Not a developer-facing tool: there is no build command and the CLI is deliberately minimal, so it needs companions like nerdctl or Buildah
  • Debugging is lower-level than Docker, and error messages assume knowledge of the runtime internals
  • Documentation is aimed at platform engineers, so newcomers usually find Docker or Podman material more useful
  • No image building at all — that is out of scope by design

Soketi

  • Maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • Dependency drift on Node and uWebSockets.js will eventually force you to fork or migrate, and that cost is unbudgeted at the point you adopt it.
  • There is no commercial support to buy, so a production incident at three in the morning is entirely your problem with no escalation path.
  • Scaling beyond a single node needs Redis and careful configuration, and getting presence channels correct across nodes is a genuine source of subtle bugs.
  • It implements the Pusher protocol rather than tracking it, so any protocol feature Pusher adds later will not appear, and the compatibility guarantee slowly decays.

Pricing, plan by plan

containerd

Free
  • containerdFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Soketi

Free
  • SoketiFree
    • MIT licensed
    • Unlimited connections subject to your own hardware
    • No vendor billing

Which should you pick?

Choose containerd if

  • You need full container lifecycle.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Windows.
  • You also want cri support.
containerd review

Choose Soketi if

  • You need pusher protocol compatibility.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
  • You also want presence and private channels.
Soketi review

Questions people ask

Is containerd or Soketi better?
Neither clearly leads. containerd starts at Free and Soketi at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, containerd or Soketi?
containerd starts at Free and Soketi at Free.
Does containerd or Soketi run on more platforms?
containerd runs on Linux, Windows. Soketi runs on Linux, macOS, Windows.
Can I use containerd for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is containerd best used for?
containerd is most often used for running the container runtime under a kubernetes cluster after the docker shim removal, building a platform or paas that needs to execute containers, reducing the moving parts on nodes that only ever run kubernetes workloads, embedding container execution inside another product. Of those, running the container runtime under a kubernetes cluster after the docker shim removal and building a platform or paas that needs to execute containers are not what Soketi is typically brought in for.
What can containerd do that Soketi cannot?
containerd covers Full container lifecycle, CRI support, OCI compliant, Snapshotter plugins. Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility, Presence and private channels, Horizontal scaling, App management backends.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

containerd: Is containerd free?

Yes. It is an open-source CNCF graduated project with no licence fee.

Soketi: Is Soketi still maintained?

Barely. The maintainer has stated that available time is very limited and releases have been sparse; treat it as community-maintained.

containerd: Do I need containerd if I use Docker?

You already have it. Docker uses containerd underneath to run containers; it is not an alternative you install separately.

Soketi: Do I need to change my client code?

No. Pusher client SDKs and Laravel Echo work by changing the host, port and credentials.

containerd: Why did Kubernetes drop Docker for containerd?

Kubernetes talks to runtimes through the Container Runtime Interface. Docker did not speak CRI natively and needed a shim, so Kubernetes removed the shim and talks to containerd directly, which Docker was already using anyway.

Soketi: What does it cost?

Nothing in licence fees. It is MIT licensed; you pay for the server it runs on.

containerd: Can containerd build images?

No. Image building is deliberately out of scope. Tools such as Buildah, BuildKit or Docker handle that.

Soketi: What are people moving to?

Laravel Reverb for Laravel applications, and Sockudo, a Rust reimplementation, for others.

Share

Related pages

More on containerd

More on Soketi

Keep looking

Other head to heads