Cloud · head to head
Portworx vs Velero

Portworx
Cloud
Kubernetes-native storage and data services, priced by the node hour
- From
- $0.33/node hour
- Rated
- -

Velero
Backup
Open source backup and migration for Kubernetes cluster resources
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Velero has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Portworx bare metal nodes are charged at 1.11 USD per node hour against 0.33 for virtual nodes, so a bare metal cluster costs more than three times a virtualised one for identical capability.; Velero there is no vendor support contract from the project itself, so a failed restore during an outage is resolved by your team reading source code and GitHub issues.
- They diverge on capability: Portworx covers Container-native volumes, Velero covers Cluster resource backup.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Portworx and Velero actually diverge.
Identical on both: platforms (Linux), 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 Portworx
- Container-native volumes
- Failure domain placement
- Volume encryption
- Database automation
- Disaster recovery
- Autopilot capacity management
- Hardware independence
Only in Velero
- Cluster resource backup
- Volume snapshots
- File-level backup
- Cross-cluster restore
- Backup hooks
- Scheduled backups
- Object storage targets
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Portworx
- Running a production PostgreSQL or Cassandra cluster on Kubernetes and needing the data to survive node lossnot Velero
- A platform team offering self-service databases to developers on an internal Kubernetes platformnot Velero
- Failing over stateful applications between clusters in different regions as a disaster recovery positionnot Velero
- An OpenShift estate where the built-in storage option does not meet the availability requirement for stateful setsnot Velero
Velero
- A platform team needing namespace-level restore after an accidental deletion, with no budget for a backup productnot Portworx
- Migrating workloads between Kubernetes clusters or between cloud providers using backup and restorenot Portworx
- Capturing cluster configuration before a risky upgrade so the previous state can be reinstatednot Portworx
- An organisation proving a Kubernetes recovery capability to an auditor before deciding whether to buy a commercial productnot Portworx
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Portworx
- Bare metal nodes are charged at 1.11 USD per node hour against 0.33 for virtual nodes, so a bare metal cluster costs more than three times a virtualised one for identical capability.
- A 1,000 node hour monthly minimum applies, which means small or intermittent clusters pay for capacity they do not consume.
- Replicating volumes across nodes consumes real capacity and network bandwidth, so the underlying infrastructure cost rises alongside the licence in a way the node hour rate does not show.
- Pure Storage ownership means roadmap priorities are set by an array vendor, and buyers should confirm that hardware independence remains contractual rather than assumed.
- Operating it well requires Kubernetes storage expertise, and teams that adopted Kubernetes to simplify operations often find they have added a distributed storage system to run.
Velero
- There is no vendor support contract from the project itself, so a failed restore during an outage is resolved by your team reading source code and GitHub issues.
- Application consistency depends on backup hooks you write and maintain, and a database backed up without a correct hook restores to a state that may not be usable.
- Restore ordering across dependent resources such as custom resource definitions and operators needs manual attention, and complex applications frequently need a documented runbook rather than a single restore command.
- Corporate engineering investment became uncertain after Broadcom acquired VMware, which is a real consideration for anyone building a long retention policy on the project.
- Object storage egress charges apply on restore and are billed by your cloud provider, so a full cluster recovery from another region carries a cost discovered during the incident rather than during planning.
Pricing, plan by plan
Portworx
$0.33/node hour- Portworx Enterprise on virtual machine nodes$0.33/node hour
- Minimum 1,000 node hours per month
- Replicated persistent volumes
- Encryption and disaster recovery
- Portworx Enterprise on bare metal nodes$1.11/node hour
- Minimum 1,000 node hours per month
- Same capabilities on bare metal clusters
- Higher rate reflects node density
Velero
Free- VeleroFree
- Apache 2.0 licensed
- No cluster or capacity limits
- Community support via Kubernetes Slack and GitHub
Which should you pick?
Choose Portworx if
- You need container-native volumes.
- You work on Linux.
- You also want failure domain placement.
Choose Velero if
- You need cluster resource backup.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux.
- You also want volume snapshots.
Questions people ask
- Is Portworx or Velero better?
- Neither clearly leads. Portworx starts at $0.33/node hour and Velero at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Portworx or Velero?
- Velero has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at $0.33/node hour for Portworx and Free for Velero.
- Does Portworx or Velero run on more platforms?
- Both run on Linux, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
- Can I use Velero for free?
- Yes. Velero has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Portworx starts at $0.33/node hour.
- What is Portworx best used for?
- Portworx is most often used for running a production postgresql or cassandra cluster on kubernetes and needing the data to survive node loss, a platform team offering self-service databases to developers on an internal kubernetes platform, failing over stateful applications between clusters in different regions as a disaster recovery position, an openshift estate where the built-in storage option does not meet the availability requirement for stateful sets. Of those, running a production postgresql or cassandra cluster on kubernetes and needing the data to survive node loss and a platform team offering self-service databases to developers on an internal kubernetes platform are not what Velero is typically brought in for.
- What can Portworx do that Velero cannot?
- Portworx covers Container-native volumes, Failure domain placement, Volume encryption, Database automation. Velero covers Cluster resource backup, Volume snapshots, File-level backup, Cross-cluster restore.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Portworx: Is Portworx tied to Pure Storage hardware?
No. It runs on any Kubernetes distribution over any underlying storage, though Pure has owned it since 2020 and sets the roadmap.
Velero: Can we buy support for Velero?
Not from the project. Several commercial Kubernetes backup products package or extend it and sell support, which is the practical route to an accountable vendor.
Portworx: What does a real cluster cost?
At 0.33 USD per virtual node hour, twenty nodes running continuously is roughly 4,800 USD a month. Bare metal at 1.11 USD per node hour is around 16,000 USD for the same node count.
Velero: Does it back up persistent volume data?
Yes, through cloud or Container Storage Interface snapshots, or through file-level upload where snapshots are not available.
Portworx: Is backup included?
No. Portworx Backup is a separately priced product covering Kubernetes application backup.
Velero: What does it cost?
Nothing to licence. You pay for object storage capacity and for egress on restore, both billed by your cloud provider.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Portworx vs OpenEBS
- Portworx vs Rancher
- Portworx vs Longhorn
- Portworx vs Podman
- Portworx vs Scaleway
- Portworx vs DigitalOcean
- Portworx vs Packer
- Portworx vs Crossplane
- Portworx vs Dokku
- Portworx vs Encore
- Portworx vs Fastly
- Portworx vs Google Cloud Platform
- Portworx vs K3s
- Portworx vs Flux
- Portworx vs Vagrant
- Portworx vs Kustomize
- Portworx vs minikube
- Portworx vs Portworx Backup
- Portworx vs Trilio
- Portworx vs Restic
- Portworx vs HYCU
- Portworx vs UrBackup
- Portworx vs Acronis Cyber Protect
- Portworx vs BDRShield
- Portworx vs Kopia
- Portworx vs Veeam Kasten for Kubernetes
- Portworx vs Amanda Enterprise
- Portworx vs Bacula Enterprise
- Portworx vs Borg Backup
- Portworx vs Axcient x360Recover
- Portworx vs Clonezilla
- Portworx vs Clumio
- Portworx vs Cohesity
- Velero vs OpenEBS
- Velero vs Rancher
- Velero vs Longhorn
- Velero vs Podman
- Velero vs Scaleway
- Velero vs DigitalOcean
- Velero vs Packer
- Velero vs Crossplane
- Velero vs Dokku
- Velero vs Encore
- Velero vs Fastly
- Velero vs Google Cloud Platform
- Velero vs K3s
- Velero vs Flux
- Velero vs Vagrant
- Velero vs Kustomize
- Velero vs minikube
- Velero vs Portworx Backup
- Velero vs Trilio
- Velero vs Restic
- Velero vs HYCU
- Velero vs UrBackup
- Velero vs Acronis Cyber Protect
- Velero vs BDRShield
- Velero vs Kopia
- Velero vs Veeam Kasten for Kubernetes
- Velero vs Amanda Enterprise
- Velero vs Bacula Enterprise
- Velero vs Borg Backup
- Velero vs Axcient x360Recover
- Velero vs Clonezilla
- Velero vs Clumio
- Velero vs Cohesity
