Softwr

Cloud · head to head

HAProxy vs VerneMQ

HAProxy logo

HAProxy

Cloud

High-performance TCP and HTTP load balancer

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
VerneMQ logo

VerneMQ

Databases

Erlang MQTT broker whose source is Apache 2.0 but whose official binaries need a paid subscription

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: HAProxy configuration syntax is dense and unforgiving, with a steep initial learning curve; VerneMQ the official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • They diverge on capability: HAProxy covers High throughput, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which HAProxy and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where HAProxy and VerneMQ differ
AttributeHAProxyVerneMQ
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hostedLinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
CategoryCloudDatabases

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 HAProxy

  • High throughput
  • Layer 4 and 7
  • Health checking
  • Rate limiting and ACLs

Only in VerneMQ

  • Erlang/OTP clustering
  • MQTT 5.0 support
  • Plugin system
  • Backpressure handling
  • Bridge support
  • Metrics export
  • MQTT over WebSockets
  • Pluggable auth backends

What people use each for

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

HAProxy

  • Load balancing at traffic levels where proxy efficiency shows up in the hardware billnot VerneMQ
  • Precise traffic control — rate limits, sticky sessions, complex routing rulesnot VerneMQ
  • TCP load balancing for databases and non-HTTP servicesnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

  • An industrial operator that wants an MQTT broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not usenot HAProxy
  • A team building from source to stay strictly under Apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglementnot HAProxy
  • A deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in Lua or over a webhooknot HAProxy
  • An organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small European company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licencesnot HAProxy

Where each one falls short

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

HAProxy

  • Configuration syntax is dense and unforgiving, with a steep initial learning curve
  • No automatic certificate management, unlike newer servers that treat it as default behaviour
  • The built-in stats page is basic, so real observability needs exporters and dashboards
  • A dedicated load balancer is more machinery than small deployments need

VerneMQ

  • The official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • Octavo Labs is a very small company, so support depth, response times and the bus factor on the codebase are materially thinner than at HiveMQ or EMQ.
  • There is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service.
  • Operating an Erlang cluster requires runtime knowledge that most teams do not have and will use for nothing else in their stack.
  • There is no vendor-managed cloud offering, so every deployment is self-operated with the infrastructure and on-call cost that implies.

Pricing, plan by plan

HAProxy

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

VerneMQ

Free
  • Source buildFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed source from GitHub
    • Full clustering and plugin capability
    • You compile and package it yourself
  • Binary packages and Docker images$undefined/year
    • Covered by the VerneMQ EULA, not Apache 2.0
    • Yearly usage subscription expected for commercial use
    • Official builds and Docker images
  • Commercial support$undefined/year
    • Evaluation, customisation and operations assistance
    • Custom development
    • Long-term maintenance agreements

Which should you pick?

Choose HAProxy if

  • You need high throughput.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
  • You also want layer 4 and 7.
HAProxy review

Choose VerneMQ if

  • You need erlang/otp clustering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
  • You also want mqtt 5.0 support.
VerneMQ review

Questions people ask

Is HAProxy or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. HAProxy starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, HAProxy or VerneMQ?
HAProxy starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does HAProxy or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
HAProxy runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use HAProxy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is HAProxy best used for?
HAProxy is most often used for load balancing at traffic levels where proxy efficiency shows up in the hardware bill, precise traffic control — rate limits, sticky sessions, complex routing rules, tcp load balancing for databases and non-http services. Of those, load balancing at traffic levels where proxy efficiency shows up in the hardware bill and precise traffic control — rate limits, sticky sessions, complex routing rules are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can HAProxy do that VerneMQ cannot?
HAProxy covers High throughput, Layer 4 and 7, Health checking, Rate limiting and ACLs. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

HAProxy: Is HAProxy free?

Yes, the community version is open source. HAProxy Technologies sells HAProxy Enterprise separately.

VerneMQ: Is VerneMQ free?

The source is Apache 2.0 and free. The official binary packages and Docker images are covered by a separate EULA that expects a yearly fee for commercial use.

HAProxy: HAProxy or Nginx?

HAProxy is a specialist load balancer with deeper balancing and health-check features. Nginx also serves static content and is more approachable, which is why it is more common as a general web server.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

Yes. Octavo Labs AG in Zurich continues to publish 2.x releases, most recently in 2026.

HAProxy: Does HAProxy handle TLS certificates automatically?

No. Certificate issuance and renewal are external, unlike Caddy where it is automatic.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

No. Every deployment is self-hosted, with commercial support available from Octavo Labs.

VerneMQ: How does it compare to EMQX?

Narrower in features and without a rule engine, but with a simpler licence story for source builds after EMQX moved to BSL.

Share

Related pages

More on HAProxy

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads