Technology · head to head
etcd vs Zabbix Cloud

etcd
Technology
A distributed key-value store using Raft consensus, built for cluster coordination rather than application data.
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: etcd it is sized for coordination data, not application data: the default backend quota is 2 GB and 8 GB is the documented recommended maximum, and exceeding it puts the cluster into a NOSPACE alarm where it accepts no writes until an operator compacts, defragments and clears the alarm by hand.; Zabbix Cloud billed by NVPS (new values per second) rather than by number of monitored hosts, so cost scales with metric volume: Nano starts at $50/month for 50 NVPS and 2xLarge reaches $5,000/month for 10,000 NVPS
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which etcd and Zabbix Cloud actually diverge.
| Attribute | etcd | Zabbix Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | On request | $50/month |
| Pricing model | open-source | subscription |
Identical on both: free tier (No), platforms (Web), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Technology).
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 etcd
- Raft consensus
- Linearizable reads
- Transactions
- Leases
- Watches
- MVCC revision history
- Role-based access control
- Snapshot backup and restore
Only in Zabbix Cloud
Nothing recorded that etcd does not also cover.
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
etcd
- Storing Kubernetes cluster state, which is what the overwhelming majority of etcd deployments are doingnot Zabbix Cloud
- Leader election and distributed locking in a home-grown scheduler or control plane, using leases and transactionsnot Zabbix Cloud
- Service discovery and dynamic configuration where readers need to be notified of changes rather than poll for themnot Zabbix Cloud
- Coordinating failover in a clustered database, as Patroni does for PostgreSQLnot Zabbix Cloud
Zabbix Cloud
- Network performance monitoring and detectionnot etcd
- Server health and performance trackingnot etcd
- Container monitoring in Kubernetes environmentsnot etcd
- Database performance across vendor platformsnot etcd
- VMware and Windows infrastructure observationnot etcd
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
etcd
- It is sized for coordination data, not application data: the default backend quota is 2 GB and 8 GB is the documented recommended maximum, and exceeding it puts the cluster into a NOSPACE alarm where it accepts no writes until an operator compacts, defragments and clears the alarm by hand.
- Every write is replicated and fsynced before acknowledgement, so cluster performance is bounded by the slowest disk in it; a member on network-attached storage with high fsync latency causes leader elections and cluster-wide latency spikes that look like network problems and are not.
- Adding members increases availability but reduces write throughput, because each write must reach a larger quorum; you run three or five members for fault tolerance, and increasing capacity means faster hardware rather than more nodes.
- There is no sharding and no multi-tenancy, so isolating workloads means running separate clusters, each with its own quorum, certificates, backup schedule and upgrade path, and that operational multiplication is often unexpected.
- Running it yourself is a real job: periodic compaction and defragmentation, snapshot backups you have actually rehearsed restoring, and rotation of both peer and client TLS certificates, none of which happens automatically outside a managed Kubernetes service.
- Losing quorum is not self-healing; recovering a cluster that has lost a majority means restoring from a snapshot and accepting that everything written since that snapshot is gone, which makes backup frequency a data-loss budget decision rather than a routine setting.
Zabbix Cloud
- Billed by NVPS (new values per second) rather than by number of monitored hosts, so cost scales with metric volume: Nano starts at $50/month for 50 NVPS and 2xLarge reaches $5,000/month for 10,000 NVPS
- The free trial lasts only 5 days before a paid subscription is required
- Annual subscription is needed to get the 10% discount; the base prices listed are monthly rates
Pricing, plan by plan
etcd
On requestNo published plan breakdown. See the etcd review.
Zabbix Cloud
$50/month- Nano$50/month
- 50 NVPS
- 10GB storage free
- Micro$100/month
- 100 NVPS
- Small$250/month
- 250 NVPS
- Medium$750/month
- 1000 NVPS
Which should you pick?
Choose Zabbix Cloud if
Nothing in the data separates Zabbix Cloud from etcd on the points above - pick on price and on how each one feels to use.
Questions people ask
- Is etcd or Zabbix Cloud better?
- Neither clearly leads. etcd starts at On request and Zabbix Cloud at $50/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, etcd or Zabbix Cloud?
- etcd starts at On request and Zabbix Cloud at $50/month.
- Does etcd or Zabbix Cloud run on more platforms?
- Both run on Web, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
- What is etcd best used for?
- etcd is most often used for storing kubernetes cluster state, which is what the overwhelming majority of etcd deployments are doing, leader election and distributed locking in a home-grown scheduler or control plane, using leases and transactions, service discovery and dynamic configuration where readers need to be notified of changes rather than poll for them, coordinating failover in a clustered database, as patroni does for postgresql. Of those, storing kubernetes cluster state, which is what the overwhelming majority of etcd deployments are doing and leader election and distributed locking in a home-grown scheduler or control plane, using leases and transactions are not what Zabbix Cloud is typically brought in for.
- What can etcd do that Zabbix Cloud cannot?
- etcd covers Raft consensus, Linearizable reads, Transactions, Leases.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
etcd: Can I use etcd as an application database?
No. It is designed for metadata and coordination, with a recommended maximum store size of around 8 GB, no sharding and a write path deliberately optimised for durability rather than throughput. Application data belongs in a database built for it.
Zabbix Cloud: What is the starting price for Zabbix Cloud?
Zabbix Cloud starts at $50 per month for the Nano tier, which includes 50 NVPS and 10GB of free storage. Pricing scales up to $5000 monthly for the 2xLarge tier with 10000 NVPS.
Sourceetcd: How many members should a cluster have?
Three for most cases, five where you need to survive two simultaneous failures. Always an odd number, because an even-sized cluster gains no additional fault tolerance while making quorum harder to reach.
Zabbix Cloud: Is there a free trial for Zabbix Cloud?
Yes, Zabbix Cloud offers a 5-day free trial with no credit card required. After the trial, you save 10% by converting to an annual subscription.
Sourceetcd: What happens when the store fills up?
The cluster raises a NOSPACE alarm and stops accepting writes, becoming effectively read-only. Recovery requires compacting old revisions, defragmenting each member and then explicitly disarming the alarm, all done by an operator.
Zabbix Cloud: How does annual billing work with Zabbix Cloud?
Annual subscribers receive a 10% discount on monthly pricing. A pricing calculator is available to estimate costs based on devices, metrics, update intervals, and storage requirements.
Sourceetcd: Why is my etcd cluster slow or unstable?
Almost always disk latency. Because every write is fsynced before acknowledgement, slow or shared storage causes heartbeat timeouts, leader elections and cascading latency. Local SSDs with low fsync latency are effectively a requirement.
etcd: How does it compare with Consul or ZooKeeper?
All three provide consensus-backed coordination. etcd has the simplest data model and the Kubernetes ecosystem behind it; Consul bundles service discovery, health checking and a service mesh; ZooKeeper is older, JVM-based and still common under Kafka and Hadoop-era systems.
Related pages
More on Zabbix Cloud
Other head to heads
- etcd vs Linear
- etcd vs Asana
- etcd vs ClickUp
- etcd vs Figma
- etcd vs Istio
- etcd vs MongoDB
- etcd vs Finxact
- etcd vs Sentry
- etcd vs Trino
- etcd vs Jenkins
- etcd vs Apache Hadoop
- etcd vs Height
- etcd vs Miro
- etcd vs Personetics
- etcd vs Plane
- etcd vs Postman
- etcd vs Raycast
- etcd vs RescueTime
- etcd vs Nagios XI
- etcd vs GitHub
- etcd vs CloudAMQP
- etcd vs Checkmk
- etcd vs Kubernetes
- etcd vs PostHog
- etcd vs Redis
- etcd vs MongoDB Atlas
- etcd vs Postgres
- etcd vs Shortcut
- etcd vs Site24x7
- etcd vs StatusCake
- etcd vs GitHub Desktop
- Zabbix Cloud vs Linear
- Zabbix Cloud vs Asana
- Zabbix Cloud vs ClickUp
- Zabbix Cloud vs Figma
- Zabbix Cloud vs Istio
- Zabbix Cloud vs MongoDB
- Zabbix Cloud vs Finxact
- Zabbix Cloud vs Sentry
- Zabbix Cloud vs Trino
- Zabbix Cloud vs Jenkins
- Zabbix Cloud vs Apache Hadoop
- Zabbix Cloud vs Height
- Zabbix Cloud vs Miro
- Zabbix Cloud vs Personetics
- Zabbix Cloud vs Plane
- Zabbix Cloud vs Postman
- Zabbix Cloud vs Raycast
- Zabbix Cloud vs RescueTime
- Zabbix Cloud vs Nagios XI
- Zabbix Cloud vs GitHub
- Zabbix Cloud vs CloudAMQP
- Zabbix Cloud vs Checkmk
- Zabbix Cloud vs Kubernetes
- Zabbix Cloud vs PostHog
- Zabbix Cloud vs Redis
- Zabbix Cloud vs MongoDB Atlas
- Zabbix Cloud vs Postgres
- Zabbix Cloud vs Shortcut
- Zabbix Cloud vs Site24x7
- Zabbix Cloud vs StatusCake
- Zabbix Cloud vs GitHub Desktop

