Softwr

Cloud · head to head

Linkerd vs Qovery

Linkerd logo

Linkerd

Cloud

Lightweight service mesh for Kubernetes

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Qovery logo

Qovery

Cloud

Deployment platform that provisions and operates Kubernetes inside your own cloud account

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Linkerd has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Linkerd deliberately fewer features than Istio, so complex routing and multi-cluster policy can hit its limits; Qovery no plan publishes a price, deployment minute overage rates are not disclosed, and there is a 14 day trial rather than a free tier, so you cannot budget or compare against alternatives without going through sales.
  • They diverge on capability: Linkerd covers Automatic mutual TLS, Qovery covers Bring your own cloud.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Linkerd and Qovery actually diverge.

Attributes where Linkerd and Qovery differ
AttributeLinkerdQovery
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsKubernetes, LinuxWeb, CLI, REST API, Kubernetes

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cloud).

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 Linkerd

  • Automatic mutual TLS
  • Golden metrics
  • Rust micro-proxy
  • Traffic policy

Only in Qovery

  • Bring your own cloud
  • Preview environments
  • Cluster lifecycle
  • Terraform provider
  • MCP server
  • Policy as code

What people use each for

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

Linkerd

  • Adding mutual TLS between services to satisfy a compliance requirementnot Qovery
  • Getting per-service latency and success rates without instrumenting applicationsnot Qovery
  • Progressive delivery with traffic splitting during rolloutsnot Qovery

Qovery

  • A regulated business that must keep application data inside its own AWS account but has nobody to build a deployment platformnot Linkerd
  • Giving twenty engineers preview environments per pull request without writing and maintaining Terraform and Helm by handnot Linkerd
  • Standardising deployment across AWS and GCP when acquisitions have left the organisation on two cloudsnot Linkerd
  • Replacing a managed platform when data residency rules put every hosted option out of reachnot Linkerd

Where each one falls short

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

Linkerd

  • Deliberately fewer features than Istio, so complex routing and multi-cluster policy can hit its limits
  • Kubernetes only, with no story for workloads outside a cluster
  • A sidecar per pod is still real memory and latency overhead, however small, and a mesh is another layer to debug during incidents

Qovery

  • No plan publishes a price, deployment minute overage rates are not disclosed, and there is a 14 day trial rather than a free tier, so you cannot budget or compare against alternatives without going through sales.
  • The GPL-3.0 engine and console do not constitute a self-hostable product, because the control plane and API are closed and the self-hosted option is gated behind Enterprise, so the open licence gives you no exit if the company changes direction.
  • Qovery provisions managed Kubernetes into your account, which means the cloud bill sits on top of the licence and Qovery initiates control plane and ingress controller upgrades on infrastructure your team is accountable for.
  • The company repositioned to agentic infrastructure in June 2026 and now ships a deployment platform, a browser development portal and autonomous coding agents concurrently, so a buyer of the deployment product is not at the centre of the roadmap.
  • Team and Business are capped at two and three connected clusters with fixed 4 vCPU CI runners and no single sign-on on Team, which pushes teams of moderate size onto quoted Enterprise pricing earlier than the plan names imply.

Pricing, plan by plan

Linkerd

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

Qovery

On request
  • Team$undefined/year
    • Billed on usage with no published rate card
    • 10 users, up to 100 environments, 2 connected clusters
    • 5,000 deployment minutes and 7 day audit logs
  • Business$undefined/year
    • Billed on usage with no published rate card
    • 20 users, up to 250 environments, 3 connected clusters
    • 10,000 deployment minutes and 30 day audit logs
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Custom users, environments and clusters
    • Self-hosted or air-gapped control plane
    • On-premises and bring-your-own-Kubernetes

Which should you pick?

Choose Linkerd if

  • You need automatic mutual tls.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Kubernetes, Linux.
  • You also want golden metrics.
Linkerd review

Choose Qovery if

  • You need bring your own cloud.
  • You work on Web, CLI, REST API, Kubernetes.
  • You also want preview environments.
Qovery review

Questions people ask

Is Linkerd or Qovery better?
Neither clearly leads. Linkerd starts at Free and Qovery at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Linkerd or Qovery?
Linkerd has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Linkerd and On request for Qovery.
Does Linkerd or Qovery run on more platforms?
Linkerd runs on Kubernetes, Linux. Qovery runs on Web, CLI, REST API, Kubernetes.
Can I use Linkerd for free?
Yes. Linkerd has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Qovery starts at On request.
What is Linkerd best used for?
Linkerd is most often used for adding mutual tls between services to satisfy a compliance requirement, getting per-service latency and success rates without instrumenting applications, progressive delivery with traffic splitting during rollouts. Of those, adding mutual tls between services to satisfy a compliance requirement and getting per-service latency and success rates without instrumenting applications are not what Qovery is typically brought in for.
What can Linkerd do that Qovery cannot?
Linkerd covers Automatic mutual TLS, Golden metrics, Rust micro-proxy, Traffic policy. Qovery covers Bring your own cloud, Preview environments, Cluster lifecycle, Terraform provider.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Linkerd: Is Linkerd free?

The open-source project is free. Buoyant, its maintainer, sells enterprise distributions and support separately.

Qovery: Does Qovery run my applications on its own servers?

No. It provisions and operates Kubernetes inside your AWS, GCP, Azure or Scaleway account, so compute and data stay with your cloud provider and that bill is entirely separate from the Qovery licence.

Linkerd: Linkerd or Istio?

Linkerd trades features for simplicity, with a smaller proxy and far less configuration. Istio is more capable and correspondingly more work to run.

Qovery: Can I self-host Qovery?

Only on Enterprise. The deployment engine and console are GPL-3.0, but the control plane is closed source and the self-hosted and air-gapped deployments are commercial Enterprise features.

Linkerd: Do I need a service mesh at all?

Only if you need mutual TLS, uniform retries or per-service traffic metrics across many services. For a handful of services it is usually more machinery than the problem justifies.

Qovery: What does it cost?

Qovery does not publish a rate card. Team and Business are billed on usage and quoted through sales, and Enterprise is fully custom. There is a 14 day trial with no card required.

Qovery: What survives if I stop paying?

The Kubernetes cluster and the workloads keep running in your cloud account, but you lose the console, the deployment pipeline, preview environments and every process built on top of them.

Share

Related pages

More on Linkerd

More on Qovery

Keep looking

Other head to heads