Softwr

Cloud · head to head

Infracost vs Nebula

Infracost logo

Infracost

Cloud

Cloud cost estimates in pull requests, with governance in the paid tier

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Nebula logo

Nebula

Networking

Certificate based overlay network from Slack, with identity and firewall rules carried in the certificate

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Infracost usage-based resources such as object storage, serverless functions and data transfer have no cost without monthly usage figures supplied by hand, and the documentation warns plainly that engineers otherwise read them as free.; Nebula the open source project has no user interface, no enrolment workflow and no revocation service, so certificate issuing, distribution and expiry become scripts you write and then have to keep working.
  • They diverge on capability: Infracost covers Pull request cost diffs, Nebula covers Certificate carried identity.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Infracost and Nebula actually diverge.

Attributes where Infracost and Nebula differ
AttributeInfracostNebula
Pricing modelFree open source tool, then per month by run volumeOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsWeb, macOS, Linux, Windows, DockerLinux, macOS, Windows, iOS, Android, FreeBSD
CategoryCloudNetworking

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 Infracost

  • Pull request cost diffs
  • Multi-format parsing
  • Apache-2.0 CLI
  • FinOps policies
  • Automated remediation
  • IDE integration

Only in Nebula

  • Certificate carried identity
  • Group based host firewall
  • Lighthouse discovery
  • Noise protocol encryption
  • Unsafe routes
  • Managed option

What people use each for

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

Infracost

  • Teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoicenot Nebula
  • Platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at allnot Nebula
  • Organisations adopting FinOps practice without buying a full cloud management platformnot Nebula
  • Engineers who want a cost figure in the editor while writing the Terraformnot Nebula

Nebula

  • Flattening a network across several clouds and datacentres without VPC peering or route tablesnot Infracost
  • Very large fleets where a central policy service on the connection path is unacceptablenot Infracost
  • Environments that already run an internal certificate authority and want the network to use itnot Infracost
  • Replacing per host iptables rules with policy written against roles that follow the hostnot Infracost

Where each one falls short

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

Infracost

  • Usage-based resources such as object storage, serverless functions and data transfer have no cost without monthly usage figures supplied by hand, and the documentation warns plainly that engineers otherwise read them as free.
  • Splitting production from non-production usage assumptions is not supported in the free usage file, which the docs attribute to a missing project filter, so that separation requires the paid product.
  • The step from 250 to 1,000 dollars a month is large and the Cloud tier includes only ten admin seats, with developer seats charged at a figure that is not published, so the cost for a large organisation cannot be computed from the pricing page.
  • Estimates are list price. Negotiated agreements, committed use discounts and reserved instance economics require SKU-level overrides available only on Enterprise, so the number in the pull request is not the number on the bill.
  • The share of the product covered by the Apache-2.0 licence is shrinking. Checks, automated fixes, policies and agent integrations are all hosted-only, so the permissive licence increasingly protects the estimation engine rather than the product.

Nebula

  • The open source project has no user interface, no enrolment workflow and no revocation service, so certificate issuing, distribution and expiry become scripts you write and then have to keep working.
  • Revoking a compromised host means distributing a blocklist entry to every other host and reloading them, which is a fleet wide operation rather than a click, and easy to get wrong under pressure.
  • Changing a host group membership means reissuing and redeploying its certificate, so policy changes are a deployment rather than a configuration edit.
  • There is no identity provider integration or single sign on in the open source version, so it maps well to servers and badly to a fleet of user laptops.
  • NAT traversal is best effort and hosts behind symmetric NAT need a relay configured deliberately, so connectivity failures show up as intermittent rather than immediate and are awkward to diagnose.

Pricing, plan by plan

Infracost

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 1,000 runs a month
    • Terraform, CloudFormation and CDK estimates
    • Community support
  • Starter$250/month
    • 10,000 runs a month
    • Email support
  • Cloud$1000/month
    • Ten admin seats, developer seats charged separately
    • FinOps policies and cost guardrails
    • Dashboards and audit trails
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • SKU-level price overrides for negotiated rates
    • Business unit reporting
    • SSO with SAML group mapping

Nebula

Free
  • NebulaFree
    • Full functionality under the MIT licence
    • No host limit
    • You operate the certificate authority and lighthouses
  • Defined Networking$undefined/month
    • Hosted control plane and enrolment
    • Managed certificate lifecycle and revocation
    • Policy and DNS interface

Which should you pick?

Choose Infracost if

  • You need pull request cost diffs.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want multi-format parsing.
Infracost review

Choose Nebula if

  • You need certificate carried identity.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, iOS, Android, FreeBSD.
  • You also want group based host firewall.
Nebula review

Questions people ask

Is Infracost or Nebula better?
Neither clearly leads. Infracost starts at Free and Nebula at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Infracost or Nebula?
Infracost starts at Free and Nebula at Free.
Does Infracost or Nebula run on more platforms?
Infracost runs on Web, macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker. Nebula runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, iOS, Android, FreeBSD.
Can I use Infracost for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Infracost best used for?
Infracost is most often used for teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoice, platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at all, organisations adopting finops practice without buying a full cloud management platform, engineers who want a cost figure in the editor while writing the terraform. Of those, teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoice and platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at all are not what Nebula is typically brought in for.
What can Infracost do that Nebula cannot?
Infracost covers Pull request cost diffs, Multi-format parsing, Apache-2.0 CLI, FinOps policies. Nebula covers Certificate carried identity, Group based host firewall, Lighthouse discovery, Noise protocol encryption.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Infracost: Is the open source version genuinely useful on its own?

Yes, for estimation. It parses your definitions and produces breakdowns and diffs locally. What it does not do is comment on pull requests, enforce policy or report across an organisation, all of which are hosted-only.

Nebula: Does it use WireGuard?

No. Nebula predates the common WireGuard mesh tools and uses the Noise protocol framework with its own certificate format.

Infracost: Will the estimate match my cloud bill?

No. It is list price. Committed use discounts, enterprise agreements and reserved instances need SKU-level overrides that sit in the Enterprise tier.

Nebula: Can I run it without Defined Networking?

Yes, entirely. Defined Networking sells the control plane conveniences, not the network itself.

Infracost: Why do my S3 and Lambda resources show no cost?

Usage-based resources need monthly usage values supplied in a usage file or defined centrally. Without them they estimate at zero, which is the documented behaviour and the most common way the tool misleads.

Nebula: How do I revoke a host?

Add its certificate fingerprint to the blocklist in the configuration of the other hosts and reload them. There is no online revocation check.

Infracost: Has the licence ever changed?

No. The command line tool has been Apache 2.0 throughout, with no Business Source or AGPL episode, which is unusual in this category.

Nebula: Is it a good fit for laptops?

Less so than the identity provider based tools. There is no single sign on, so every laptop needs a certificate issued and renewed by whatever process you build.

Infracost: What is a run?

Not defined on the public pricing page, and the run allowance is what separates the free and Starter tiers, so establish the definition before choosing between them.

Share

Related pages

More on Infracost

More on Nebula

Keep looking

Other head to heads