Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Hatchet vs Nango

Hatchet logo

Hatchet

Automation Integration

Postgres-backed distributed task queue and workflow engine for Python, TypeScript and Go

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Nango logo

Nango

Automation Integration

Open source unified API and OAuth infrastructure for product integrations, licensed under Elastic License 2.0

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Hatchet postgres as the queue backend simplifies operations but sets a throughput ceiling, and very high task rates require database tuning or partitioning work that a purpose-built queue would not demand.; Nango the licence is Elastic License 2.0, which is source available rather than OSI open source, and it forbids offering Nango to third parties as a managed service, so anyone planning to resell or embed it in a platform for their own customers has a genuine legal problem.
  • They diverge on capability: Hatchet covers Postgres-backed queue, Nango covers Managed OAuth.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Hatchet and Nango actually diverge.

Attributes where Hatchet and Nango differ
AttributeHatchetNango
Pricing modelPer month by task run countPer connection per month
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudWeb, Linux, Docker

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Automation Integration).

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 Hatchet

  • Postgres-backed queue
  • Durable execution
  • DAG workflows
  • Concurrency and fairness
  • Rate limiting
  • Cron and scheduling
  • Multi-language SDKs

Only in Nango

  • Managed OAuth
  • Pre-built integrations
  • Custom syncs and actions
  • Incremental sync
  • Rate limit and retry handling
  • Webhooks
  • Unified models

Both cover

  • Self-hosting

What people use each for

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

Hatchet

  • An AI product running long agent pipelines that must survive worker restarts and resume mid-workflownot Nango
  • A team that outgrew Celery and wants concurrency keys, fairness and rate limiting without building themnot Nango
  • An engineering group that wants durable execution self-hosted with no datastore beyond the Postgres they already runnot Nango
  • A multi-tenant SaaS that needs one noisy customer's jobs not to starve everyone else'snot Nango

Nango

  • A SaaS product that needs to ship twenty customer-facing integrations without hiring a team to maintain OAuth and token refresh for eachnot Hatchet
  • A team that needs a niche or internal API integrated, which closed unified API vendors will not build for themnot Hatchet
  • A company with data residency or security constraints that must self-host the integration layer rather than send customer tokens to a vendornot Hatchet
  • An engineering team replacing a homegrown integration service whose main cost is silent token expiry and rate limit failures in productionnot Hatchet

Where each one falls short

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

Hatchet

  • Postgres as the queue backend simplifies operations but sets a throughput ceiling, and very high task rates require database tuning or partitioning work that a purpose-built queue would not demand.
  • Data retention on the managed tiers is three days on Team and seven on Scale, which is short for debugging intermittent failures and forces you to export run history elsewhere.
  • The step from the free tier to Team is 500 US dollars a month plus usage, which is a large increment for a small team that simply needs a production SLA.
  • Hatchet is a young company in a category with Temporal, Inngest and cloud-native alternatives already established, so ecosystem, hiring pool and third-party material are all thin.
  • Self-hosting the MIT engine is realistic but you then run the engine, its Postgres and its workers yourself, and the managed features such as audit logs and support are not part of that.

Nango

  • The licence is Elastic License 2.0, which is source available rather than OSI open source, and it forbids offering Nango to third parties as a managed service, so anyone planning to resell or embed it in a platform for their own customers has a genuine legal problem.
  • Pricing is per connection where a connection is one authorised end-user account, so cost scales linearly with your customer base and a product where each user links several services multiplies quickly beyond what a headline plan price suggests.
  • Pre-built integrations vary in depth, and a connection that exists is not the same as a connection that covers the endpoints and objects your feature needs, so each one must be verified before it is designed into a roadmap.
  • Custom syncs are written in TypeScript and run in Nango model, which means integration logic lives in a vendor runtime and migrating away later requires rewriting it rather than lifting it out.
  • Self-hosting removes the vendor from the data path but transfers operational responsibility for a component that holds customer OAuth tokens, and few teams appreciate the security burden that comes with running that themselves.

Pricing, plan by plan

Hatchet

Free
  • DeveloperFree
    • First 100,000 task runs included
    • $10 per million task runs after
    • No card required
  • Team$500/month
    • Usage billed on top of the base fee
    • 10 users and 5 tenants
    • 3 day data retention
  • Scale$1000/month
    • Unlimited users and tenants
    • 7 day data retention
    • Audit logs
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • 300 million plus runs a month
    • Latency guarantees and custom SLAs
    • SSO and audit logging

Nango

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 10 connections
    • Pre-built integrations
    • Managed OAuth
  • Starter$50/month
    • 20 connections included
    • 1 USD per additional connection
    • Custom syncs and actions
  • Growth$500/month
    • 100 connections included
    • 1 USD per additional connection
    • Higher limits
  • Enterprise$undefined/month
    • Quoted
    • Custom connection volumes
    • Security review and SLA

Which should you pick?

Choose Hatchet if

  • You need postgres-backed queue.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want durable execution.
Hatchet review

Choose Nango if

  • You need managed oauth.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Linux, Docker.
  • You also want pre-built integrations.
Nango review

Questions people ask

Is Hatchet or Nango better?
Neither clearly leads. Hatchet starts at Free and Nango at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Hatchet or Nango?
Hatchet starts at Free and Nango at Free.
Does Hatchet or Nango run on more platforms?
Hatchet runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Nango runs on Web, Linux, Docker.
Can I use Hatchet for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Hatchet best used for?
Hatchet is most often used for an ai product running long agent pipelines that must survive worker restarts and resume mid-workflow, a team that outgrew celery and wants concurrency keys, fairness and rate limiting without building them, an engineering group that wants durable execution self-hosted with no datastore beyond the postgres they already run, a multi-tenant saas that needs one noisy customer's jobs not to starve everyone else's. Of those, an ai product running long agent pipelines that must survive worker restarts and resume mid-workflow and a team that outgrew celery and wants concurrency keys, fairness and rate limiting without building them are not what Nango is typically brought in for.
What can Hatchet do that Nango cannot?
Hatchet covers Postgres-backed queue, Durable execution, DAG workflows, Concurrency and fairness. Nango covers Managed OAuth, Pre-built integrations, Custom syncs and actions, Incremental sync. Both handle Self-hosting.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Hatchet: Is Hatchet open source?

Yes, the engine is MIT licensed and can be self-hosted, with a managed cloud offered alongside.

Nango: Is Nango open source?

It is source available under Elastic License 2.0. You can read, modify and self-host it, but you cannot offer it to third parties as a managed service. That is not the same as an OSI approved open source licence.

Hatchet: What does it cost?

Free for the first 100,000 task runs, then 10 US dollars per million. Team is 500 US dollars a month plus usage; Scale is 1,000.

Nango: How is it priced?

Per connection per month, where a connection is one authorised end-user account. Free to 10 connections, 50 dollars a month for Starter with 20, 500 for Growth with 100, and one dollar per additional connection.

Hatchet: Why Postgres as the queue?

So durable task state lives in a database your team already backs up, replicates and can inspect with SQL, instead of a second system.

Nango: Can we integrate an API Nango does not support?

Yes. Custom syncs and actions in TypeScript cover any API including internal ones, which is the main advantage over closed unified API products.

Hatchet: How does it compare with Temporal?

Lighter to adopt and operate, with a much smaller ecosystem and a lower throughput ceiling from the Postgres backend.

Nango: Can we self-host it?

Yes, under the Elastic License 2.0 terms, which permit self-hosting for your own use but not resale as a service.

Share

Related pages

More on Hatchet

More on Nango

Keep looking

Other head to heads