Databases · head to head
DuckDB vs FaunaDB

DuckDB
Databases
MIT-licensed analytical SQL database that runs inside your process, with no server, no dependencies and one writer at a time.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -

FaunaDB
Databases
Document-relational database whose hosted service closed in 2025 and whose core is now unmaintained Apache 2.0 code.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: DuckDB a database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.; FaunaDB the hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.
- They diverge on capability: DuckDB covers In-process execution, FaunaDB covers Document-relational model.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which DuckDB and FaunaDB actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases).
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 DuckDB
- In-process execution
- Vectorised columnar engine
- Direct file querying
- Zero dependencies
- Larger-than-memory queries
- MIT licence
- Postgres-flavoured SQL
- Extension ecosystem
Only in FaunaDB
- Document-relational model
- FQL v10
- Distributed ACID transactions
- HTTPS access
- User-defined functions
- Attribute-based access control
- Document history
- Event streaming
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
DuckDB
- Transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need Spark, replaced by SQL over Parquet in a single processnot FaunaDB
- Analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptablenot FaunaDB
- Local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehousenot FaunaDB
- Continuous integration and testing of analytical SQL, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anythingnot FaunaDB
FaunaDB
- Keeping an existing Fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and fundednot DuckDB
- Extracting historical data from a Fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted APInot DuckDB
- Studying a production implementation of deterministic distributed transactions, since the full server source is now readable under Apache 2.0not DuckDB
- Forking the engine deliberately, where an organisation has JVM and distributed-systems staff and wants a document-relational store it fully controlsnot DuckDB
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
DuckDB
- A database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.
- There is no network protocol, authentication or user management, so exposing it to remote clients means writing and securing your own service around it.
- It is built for scans and aggregations, not for many small transactions, so a workload of high-frequency single-row inserts and updates performs badly compared with SQLite or Postgres.
- Storage files are backwards compatible but not forwards compatible, so a file written by a newer version cannot be read by an older one and every consumer of a shared file must be upgraded together.
- Query memory settings matter: some operations still need to hold significant state, so an under-configured memory limit turns a large join or a high-cardinality aggregation into a spill-heavy query or an out-of-memory failure rather than a slow success.
FaunaDB
- The hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.
- The open-sourced repository has had no substantive activity since May 2025 and the drivers were frozen alongside it, so you inherit responsibility for security patches in a Scala distributed database that almost nobody else is running.
- FQL has no wire or dialect compatibility with anything else, so migrating off is a rewrite of every query, index and access rule in the application rather than a data export.
- No BI tool, ORM or CDC connector speaks FQL, so reporting and analytics always required exporting the data first, and that export tooling is now also unmaintained.
- The community was small before the shutdown and has dispersed since, so operational answers, tuning advice and people who have run a Fauna cluster in anger are all scarce when something breaks.
Pricing, plan by plan
DuckDB
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the DuckDB review.
FaunaDB
Free- FreeFree
- 100K read ops
- 50K write ops
- 1GB storage
- Pro$25/month
- Pay per use
- Priority support
- Advanced features
Which should you pick?
Choose DuckDB if
- You need in-process execution.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly.
- You also want vectorised columnar engine.
Choose FaunaDB if
- You need document-relational model.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want fql v10.
Questions people ask
- Is DuckDB or FaunaDB better?
- Neither clearly leads. DuckDB starts at Free and FaunaDB at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, DuckDB or FaunaDB?
- DuckDB starts at Free and FaunaDB at Free.
- Does DuckDB or FaunaDB run on more platforms?
- DuckDB runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly. FaunaDB runs on Web.
- Can I use DuckDB for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is DuckDB best used for?
- DuckDB is most often used for transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process, analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable, local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehouse, continuous integration and testing of analytical sql, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anything. Of those, transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process and analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable are not what FaunaDB is typically brought in for.
- What can DuckDB do that FaunaDB cannot?
- DuckDB covers In-process execution, Vectorised columnar engine, Direct file querying, Zero dependencies. FaunaDB covers Document-relational model, FQL v10, Distributed ACID transactions, HTTPS access.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
DuckDB: Can multiple applications share one DuckDB database?
Not for writing. One process holds the database read-write; others may attach read-only and will not see later writes. Shared multi-writer access needs a different database or a table format with a catalogue.
FaunaDB: Can I still sign up for Fauna as a service?
No. Fauna Inc. wound down the hosted service in 2025 and the company website is no longer serving. The only way to run Fauna now is to build and operate the open-sourced server yourself.
DuckDB: Is it a replacement for a data warehouse?
For single-node analytical workloads up to a few hundred gigabytes it very often is. It is not a replacement when many concurrent users need a shared, governed, always-on service.
FaunaDB: What licence is the open-sourced code under?
Apache 2.0, with the copyright held by a FaunaDB Foundation. That is a permissive OSI licence with no competing-use clause, so you may run it, modify it and even offer it as a service.
DuckDB: Do I have to load data into it?
No. It queries Parquet, CSV, JSON and Arrow in place, including on object storage. Its own storage format is optional and mainly useful when you want indexes, constraints and faster repeated access.
FaunaDB: Is the open source version the same software that ran the cloud?
It is the core database engine. The control plane, billing, dashboard and multi-tenant operational tooling that made it a service are not part of the release, so you are running the engine, not the product.
DuckDB: What is MotherDuck's relationship to it?
MotherDuck is a separate company offering a managed and hybrid service built on the DuckDB engine. DuckDB itself remains MIT-licensed and independent of it, with the IP held by the DuckDB Foundation.
FaunaDB: What should I migrate to?
There is no drop-in target. Teams that valued the document model with relationships usually land on Postgres with JSONB, and teams that valued the serverless HTTP access pattern usually land on DynamoDB or a managed Postgres with an HTTP driver. Either way the query layer is rewritten.
DuckDB: Is it suitable for OLTP?
No. It is designed for analytical scans. For transactional workloads with frequent small writes, SQLite or Postgres is the right tool.
FaunaDB: How hard is it to self-host?
It builds as a fat JAR and runs as a multi-node JVM cluster. There is an OPERATING.md, but no supported packaging, no operator, no upstream releases and no support contract, so budget for a distributed-systems engineer, not a container.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- DuckDB vs SingleStore
- DuckDB vs SQLite
- DuckDB vs PostgreSQL
- DuckDB vs Cockroach Labs
- DuckDB vs Airtable
- DuckDB vs Amazon Aurora
- DuckDB vs ClickHouse
- DuckDB vs Apache Druid
- DuckDB vs Firebolt
- DuckDB vs OpenSearch
- DuckDB vs StarRocks
- DuckDB vs DataGrip
- DuckDB vs Estuary
- DuckDB vs Apache Pinot
- DuckDB vs Apache Pulsar
- DuckDB vs Cassandra
- DuckDB vs CouchDB
- DuckDB vs BigQuery
- DuckDB vs CosmosDB
- DuckDB vs ArangoDB
- DuckDB vs Dgraph
- DuckDB vs DynamoDB
- DuckDB vs Google Cloud SQL
- DuckDB vs Amazon RDS
- DuckDB vs Amazon Redshift
- FaunaDB vs SingleStore
- FaunaDB vs SQLite
- FaunaDB vs PostgreSQL
- FaunaDB vs Cockroach Labs
- FaunaDB vs Airtable
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Aurora
- FaunaDB vs ClickHouse
- FaunaDB vs Apache Druid
- FaunaDB vs Firebolt
- FaunaDB vs OpenSearch
- FaunaDB vs StarRocks
- FaunaDB vs DataGrip
- FaunaDB vs Estuary
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pinot
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pulsar
- FaunaDB vs Cassandra
- FaunaDB vs CouchDB
- FaunaDB vs BigQuery
- FaunaDB vs CosmosDB
- FaunaDB vs ArangoDB
- FaunaDB vs Dgraph
- FaunaDB vs DynamoDB
- FaunaDB vs Google Cloud SQL
- FaunaDB vs Amazon RDS
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Redshift
