Softwr

Databases · head to head

DynamoDB vs NATS

DynamoDB logo

DynamoDB

Databases

AWS-only managed key-value and document database with fixed per-partition throughput limits and no ad hoc queries.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
NATS logo

NATS

Databases

High-performance messaging system for cloud-native applications

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: DynamoDB access patterns must be designed into the key schema before launch; a query nobody anticipated needs a new global secondary index, which is a full extra copy of the projected attributes billed as storage and as writes, or an offline migration.; NATS core NATS has no persistence at all, so messages are lost if no subscriber is listening
  • They diverge on capability: DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, NATS covers Very low latency.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which DynamoDB and NATS actually diverge.

Attributes where DynamoDB and NATS differ
AttributeDynamoDBNATS
Pricing modelusage-basedOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsAWSLinux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes
Founded2006Unknown

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 DynamoDB

  • Managed and serverless
  • Predictable latency
  • On-demand or provisioned capacity
  • Global secondary indexes
  • Transactions
  • DynamoDB Streams
  • Global tables
  • Point-in-time recovery

Only in NATS

  • Very low latency
  • JetStream
  • Single binary
  • Request-reply

What people use each for

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

DynamoDB

  • High-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and knownnot NATS
  • Traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercisenot NATS
  • Serverless applications on Lambda, where an HTTP-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases havenot NATS
  • Event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifiernot NATS

NATS

  • Service-to-service messaging where latency is the binding constraintnot DynamoDB
  • Edge and IoT messaging where a lightweight broker mattersnot DynamoDB
  • Replacing a heavier broker when the workload does not need its guaranteesnot DynamoDB

Where each one falls short

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

DynamoDB

  • Access patterns must be designed into the key schema before launch; a query nobody anticipated needs a new global secondary index, which is a full extra copy of the projected attributes billed as storage and as writes, or an offline migration.
  • Global secondary indexes are eventually consistent and cannot be read strongly, so a read-after-write against an index can legitimately miss the item that was just written, and application code must be written to tolerate that.
  • Per-partition throughput is capped at roughly 3,000 read and 1,000 write units, so a hot key throttles even when the table has spare capacity overall, and the only real fix is changing the key design to spread the load.
  • Items are limited to 400 KB and query results paginate at 1 MB, so large or list-shaped data has to be split, offloaded to S3 with a pointer, or read through pagination loops that complicate every consumer.
  • It runs only on AWS and the API is proprietary rather than a standard, so moving the data layer means rewriting it; ScyllaDB's Alternator is the only meaningfully compatible target and it brings a much smaller ecosystem.

NATS

  • Core NATS has no persistence at all, so messages are lost if no subscriber is listening
  • JetStream adds the durability but also the operational complexity NATS is chosen to avoid
  • A much smaller ecosystem than Kafka or RabbitMQ, with fewer connectors and integrations
  • Fewer people know it, so hiring and existing organisational knowledge favour the alternatives

Pricing, plan by plan

DynamoDB

Free
  • On-Demand Capacity$null/usage-based
    • Pay-per-request pricing with automatic scaling
    • Read: 0.5 RRU per 4 KB (eventually consistent), 1 RRU per 4 KB (strongly consistent), 2 RRU per 4 KB (transactional)
    • Write: 1 WRU per 1 KB
  • Provisioned Capacity$null/hourly
    • Fixed hourly charges based on reserved capacity
    • RCU rate: $0.00013 per hour (Standard)
    • WCU rate: $0.00065 per hour (Standard)
  • Standard Table Class Storage$0.25/per GB/month
    • $0.25 per GB/month after free tier
    • First 25 GB free per month (free tier)
  • Standard-Infrequent Access Table Class$0.1/per GB/month
    • $0.10 per GB/month

NATS

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

Which should you pick?

Choose DynamoDB if

  • You need managed and serverless.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on AWS.
  • You also want predictable latency.
DynamoDB review

Choose NATS if

  • You need very low latency.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want jetstream.
NATS review

Questions people ask

Is DynamoDB or NATS better?
Neither clearly leads. DynamoDB starts at Free and NATS at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, DynamoDB or NATS?
DynamoDB starts at Free and NATS at Free.
Does DynamoDB or NATS run on more platforms?
DynamoDB runs on AWS. NATS runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
Can I use DynamoDB for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is DynamoDB best used for?
DynamoDB is most often used for high-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and known, traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercise, serverless applications on lambda, where an http-based datastore avoids the connection pooling problem relational databases have, event or telemetry ingestion where writes vastly outnumber reads and each record is retrieved by a known identifier. Of those, high-volume keyed workloads such as sessions, shopping carts, device state or user profiles where the access pattern is fixed and known and traffic that spikes unpredictably, where on-demand capacity absorbs a burst without a capacity-planning exercise are not what NATS is typically brought in for.
What can DynamoDB do that NATS cannot?
DynamoDB covers Managed and serverless, Predictable latency, On-demand or provisioned capacity, Global secondary indexes. NATS covers Very low latency, JetStream, Single binary, Request-reply.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

DynamoDB: On-demand or provisioned capacity?

On-demand suits unpredictable or spiky traffic and removes capacity planning. Provisioned with autoscaling is considerably cheaper for steady high-volume workloads. Tables can be switched between them, though not arbitrarily often.

NATS: Is NATS free?

Yes, open source and CNCF-graduated. Synadia sells a managed service.

DynamoDB: Can I run DynamoDB outside AWS?

No. DynamoDB Local exists for development and testing only. For a production-compatible alternative elsewhere, ScyllaDB's Alternator implements the DynamoDB API, but it is a different system with a different ecosystem.

NATS: Does NATS persist messages?

Core NATS does not — it is fire-and-forget. JetStream adds persistence, streaming and replay when you need them.

DynamoDB: Can I run ad hoc queries or analytics?

Not on the table itself. Scans are slow and expensive at scale. The usual pattern is to export to S3 or stream changes out and query them in Athena, Redshift or another analytical engine.

NATS: NATS or Kafka?

NATS is far lighter and lower latency, and much simpler to run. Kafka is the answer when you need a durable replayable log and a large connector ecosystem.

DynamoDB: Is single-table design necessary?

It is the pattern that gets the most from DynamoDB when access patterns are well known, because it lets related items be retrieved in one query. It also makes the model harder to evolve, so many teams reasonably choose multiple simpler tables and accept extra requests.

DynamoDB: What are the real limits I should design around?

400 KB per item, 1 MB per query or scan page, 100 items per transaction, roughly 3,000 read and 1,000 write units per partition, and eventual consistency on global secondary indexes.

Share

Related pages

More on DynamoDB

More on NATS

Keep looking

Other head to heads