Softwr

APIs · head to head

Convoy vs Zipkin

Convoy logo

Convoy

APIs

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

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Zipkin logo

Zipkin

Cloud

Distributed tracing system for microservice latency

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.; Zipkin less active development and smaller community momentum than Jaeger
  • They diverge on capability: Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Zipkin covers Trace collection and search.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Convoy and Zipkin actually diverge.

Attributes where Convoy and Zipkin differ
AttributeConvoyZipkin
Pricing modelPer month, flat rate regardless of volumeOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted
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 Zipkin

  • Trace collection and search
  • Dependency diagram
  • Simple deployment
  • Pluggable storage

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 Zipkin
  • A high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licencenot Zipkin
  • A team that also receives webhooks from many providers and wants ingestion, verification and deduplication in the same gatewaynot Zipkin
  • An engineering group that wants webhook delivery driven directly from an existing Kafka or SQS topicnot Zipkin

Zipkin

  • Adding distributed tracing quickly without standing up heavy infrastructurenot Convoy
  • Java and Spring Boot estates, where instrumentation support is long-establishednot Convoy
  • Small deployments where Jaeger is more than the problem requiresnot 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.

Zipkin

  • Less active development and smaller community momentum than Jaeger
  • Fewer features: sampling, storage options and UI are all more limited
  • The interface is dated and slower to work with on large trace volumes
  • Tracing alone still leaves metrics and logs in separate tools during an incident

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

Zipkin

Free
  • ZipkinFree
    • 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 Zipkin if

  • You need trace collection and search.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
  • You also want dependency diagram.
Zipkin review

Questions people ask

Is Convoy or Zipkin better?
Neither clearly leads. Convoy starts at Free and Zipkin at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Convoy or Zipkin?
Convoy starts at Free and Zipkin at Free.
Does Convoy or Zipkin run on more platforms?
Convoy runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Zipkin runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
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 Zipkin is typically brought in for.
What can Convoy do that Zipkin cannot?
Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Broker-driven ingestion, Payload transformation, Portal links. Zipkin covers Trace collection and search, Dependency diagram, Simple deployment, Pluggable storage.

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.

Zipkin: Is Zipkin free?

Yes, open source with no licence fee.

Convoy: What does premium cost?

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

Zipkin: Zipkin or Jaeger?

Jaeger has more momentum, more features and CNCF backing. Zipkin is lighter and quicker to stand up, and remains well supported in the Java and Spring ecosystem.

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.

Zipkin: Does Zipkin work with OpenTelemetry?

Yes. OpenTelemetry can export to Zipkin, which is now the usual way to instrument for it.

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 Zipkin

Keep looking

Other head to heads