Softwr

APIs · head to head

Convoy vs Linkerd

Convoy logo

Convoy

APIs

Open source webhooks gateway you self-host, handling both sending and receiving

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Linkerd logo

Linkerd

Cloud

Lightweight service mesh for Kubernetes

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Convoy the default deployment is self-hosted, so you operate Convoy plus Postgres and Redis and carry the on-call burden for the system that delivers your customers' events.; Linkerd deliberately fewer features than Istio, so complex routing and multi-cluster policy can hit its limits
  • They diverge on capability: Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Linkerd covers Automatic mutual TLS.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Convoy and Linkerd actually diverge.

Attributes where Convoy and Linkerd differ
AttributeConvoyLinkerd
Pricing modelPer month, flat rate regardless of volumeOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudKubernetes, Linux
CategoryAPIsCloud

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 Convoy

  • Inbound and outbound
  • Broker-driven ingestion
  • Payload transformation
  • Portal links
  • Circuit breaking
  • Retry policies
  • OpenTelemetry export
  • Role-based access control

Only in Linkerd

  • Automatic mutual TLS
  • Golden metrics
  • Rust micro-proxy
  • Traffic policy

What people use each for

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

Convoy

  • A fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party SaaS for compliance reasonsnot Linkerd
  • A high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licencenot Linkerd
  • A team that also receives webhooks from many providers and wants ingestion, verification and deduplication in the same gatewaynot Linkerd
  • An engineering group that wants webhook delivery driven directly from an existing Kafka or SQS topicnot Linkerd

Linkerd

  • Adding mutual TLS between services to satisfy a compliance requirementnot Convoy
  • Getting per-service latency and success rates without instrumenting applicationsnot Convoy
  • Progressive delivery with traffic splitting during rolloutsnot Convoy

Where each one falls short

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

Convoy

  • The default deployment is self-hosted, so you operate Convoy plus Postgres and Redis and carry the on-call burden for the system that delivers your customers' events.
  • Frain Technologies is a small startup, and putting customer-facing delivery infrastructure on it means accepting real vendor continuity risk on a component that is hard to swap out quickly.
  • The premium tier at a flat 999 US dollars a month is poor value below substantial volume, while the community edition omits the portal, transformations and RBAC that most production deployments end up wanting.
  • The hosted cloud trial is capped at one project and 100 events a day, which is too small to properly evaluate the service before committing.
  • Documentation and the third-party ecosystem are thinner than the established webhook services, so unusual configurations often mean reading the Go source.

Linkerd

  • Deliberately fewer features than Istio, so complex routing and multi-cluster policy can hit its limits
  • Kubernetes only, with no story for workloads outside a cluster
  • A sidecar per pod is still real memory and latency overhead, however small, and a mesh is another layer to debug during incidents

Pricing, plan by plan

Convoy

Free
  • CommunityFree
    • Self-hosted open source gateway
    • Inbound and outbound webhooks
    • Automatic retries and message broker support
  • Premium$999/month
    • Flat rate irrespective of message volume
    • Portal links and payload transformation
    • RBAC, circuit breaking and white labelling
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • SAML SSO
    • Dedicated support with SLA
    • On-premises deployment assistance
  • Cloud$undefined/month
    • Hosted by Convoy
    • 14 day trial limited to one project and 100 events a day
    • Usage-based tiers above the trial

Linkerd

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

Which should you pick?

Choose Convoy if

  • You need inbound and outbound.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want broker-driven ingestion.
Convoy review

Choose Linkerd if

  • You need automatic mutual tls.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Kubernetes, Linux.
  • You also want golden metrics.
Linkerd review

Questions people ask

Is Convoy or Linkerd better?
Neither clearly leads. Convoy starts at Free and Linkerd at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Convoy or Linkerd?
Convoy starts at Free and Linkerd at Free.
Does Convoy or Linkerd run on more platforms?
Convoy runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Linkerd runs on Kubernetes, Linux.
Can I use Convoy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Convoy best used for?
Convoy is most often used for a fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party saas for compliance reasons, a high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licence, a team that also receives webhooks from many providers and wants ingestion, verification and deduplication in the same gateway, an engineering group that wants webhook delivery driven directly from an existing kafka or sqs topic. Of those, a fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party saas for compliance reasons and a high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licence are not what Linkerd is typically brought in for.
What can Convoy do that Linkerd cannot?
Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Broker-driven ingestion, Payload transformation, Portal links. Linkerd covers Automatic mutual TLS, Golden metrics, Rust micro-proxy, Traffic policy.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Convoy: Is Convoy really open source?

Yes, the community edition is open source and self-hostable, covering both inbound and outbound webhooks with retries.

Linkerd: Is Linkerd free?

The open-source project is free. Buoyant, its maintainer, sells enterprise distributions and support separately.

Convoy: What does premium cost?

A flat 999 US dollars a month, self-hosted, regardless of message volume.

Linkerd: Linkerd or Istio?

Linkerd trades features for simplicity, with a smaller proxy and far less configuration. Istio is more capable and correspondingly more work to run.

Convoy: Does it receive webhooks as well as send them?

Yes, inbound ingestion with verification and deduplication is a first-class feature, unlike most webhook services.

Linkerd: Do I need a service mesh at all?

Only if you need mutual TLS, uniform retries or per-service traffic metrics across many services. For a handful of services it is usually more machinery than the problem justifies.

Convoy: Do I have to self-host?

No, there is a hosted cloud, but the trial is capped at 100 events a day and self-hosting is the primary model.

Share

Related pages

More on Convoy

More on Linkerd

Keep looking

Other head to heads