Cloud · head to head
Qovery vs Vitess

Qovery
Cloud
Deployment platform that provisions and operates Kubernetes inside your own cloud account
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -

Vitess
Databases
Scalable database clustering system for horizontal scaling of MySQL
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Vitess has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: 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.; Vitess vTGate scatter queries without sharding key incur significant performance penalties
- They diverge on capability: Qovery covers Bring your own cloud, Vitess covers Horizontal Sharding.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Qovery and Vitess actually diverge.
Identical on both: 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 Qovery
- Bring your own cloud
- Preview environments
- Cluster lifecycle
- Terraform provider
- MCP server
- Policy as code
Only in Vitess
- Horizontal Sharding
- Connection Pooling
- Query Routing
- Online Schema Changes
- Shard Management
- Replication Management
- Automated Failover
- MySQL
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Qovery
- A regulated business that must keep application data inside its own AWS account but has nobody to build a deployment platformnot Vitess
- Giving twenty engineers preview environments per pull request without writing and maintaining Terraform and Helm by handnot Vitess
- Standardising deployment across AWS and GCP when acquisitions have left the organisation on two cloudsnot Vitess
- Replacing a managed platform when data residency rules put every hosted option out of reachnot Vitess
Vitess
- Transaction processingnot Qovery
- Data storagenot Qovery
- Application backendnot Qovery
- Reportingnot Qovery
- Data analyticsnot Qovery
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
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.
Vitess
- VTGate scatter queries without sharding key incur significant performance penalties
- Foreign key constraints not enforced across shards, requiring application-level integrity handling
- Single primary per keyspace limits multi-region write capabilities
- Distributed transactions without proper sharding key routing suffer performance degradation
Pricing, plan by plan
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
Vitess
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the Vitess review.
Which should you pick?
Choose Qovery if
- You need bring your own cloud.
- You work on Web, CLI, REST API, Kubernetes.
- You also want preview environments.
Choose Vitess if
- You need horizontal sharding.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Docker, Kubernetes.
- You also want connection pooling.
Questions people ask
- Is Qovery or Vitess better?
- Neither clearly leads. Qovery starts at On request and Vitess at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Qovery or Vitess?
- Vitess has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Qovery and Free for Vitess.
- Does Qovery or Vitess run on more platforms?
- Qovery runs on Web, CLI, REST API, Kubernetes. Vitess runs on Linux, macOS, Docker, Kubernetes.
- Can I use Vitess for free?
- Yes. Vitess has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Qovery starts at On request.
- What is Qovery best used for?
- Qovery is most often used for a regulated business that must keep application data inside its own aws account but has nobody to build a deployment platform, giving twenty engineers preview environments per pull request without writing and maintaining terraform and helm by hand, standardising deployment across aws and gcp when acquisitions have left the organisation on two clouds, replacing a managed platform when data residency rules put every hosted option out of reach. Of those, a regulated business that must keep application data inside its own aws account but has nobody to build a deployment platform and giving twenty engineers preview environments per pull request without writing and maintaining terraform and helm by hand are not what Vitess is typically brought in for.
- What can Qovery do that Vitess cannot?
- Qovery covers Bring your own cloud, Preview environments, Cluster lifecycle, Terraform provider. Vitess covers Horizontal Sharding, Connection Pooling, Query Routing, Online Schema Changes.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
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.
Vitess: Is Vitess free to use?
Yes. Vitess is completely free and open source under the Apache 2.0 license. It is a graduated CNCF project with no licensing costs or pricing tiers.
SourceQovery: 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.
Vitess: What databases does Vitess support?
Vitess supports MySQL and MariaDB as backend databases. It acts as a middleware layer that adds sharding and orchestration capabilities on top of these databases.
SourceQovery: 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.
Vitess: Does Vitess require Kubernetes to run?
No. Vitess can run on Kubernetes using the Vitess Operator, but it can also be deployed on traditional infrastructure. Kubernetes integration is optional and provides additional automation benefits.
SourceQovery: 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.
Vitess: How does Vitess handle cross-shard transactions?
Vitess supports distributed transactions across shards, but they require queries to be routed through the sharding key. Transactions without a proper sharding key can result in slower performance.
SourceVitess: Does Vitess enforce foreign key constraints?
Vitess does not enforce foreign key constraints across shards by default. Referential integrity must be managed at the application layer, though per-database support can be enabled with limitations.
SourceRelated pages
Other head to heads
- Qovery vs Render
- Qovery vs Porter
- Qovery vs Northflank
- Qovery vs CapRover
- Qovery vs Coolify
- Qovery vs Railway
- Qovery vs Dokku
- Qovery vs Scaleway
- Qovery vs Portworx
- Qovery vs Podman
- Qovery vs containerd
- Qovery vs Encore
- Qovery vs Oracle Cloud
- Qovery vs Orca Security
- Qovery vs Packer
- Qovery vs OpenTelemetry
- Qovery vs Rook
- Qovery vs Cockroach Labs
- Qovery vs TiDB
- Qovery vs Readyset
- Qovery vs Amazon Aurora
- Qovery vs NATS
- Qovery vs PostgreSQL
- Qovery vs RabbitMQ
- Qovery vs ClickHouse
- Qovery vs Azure SQL
- Qovery vs MariaDB
- Qovery vs Oracle Database
- Qovery vs IBM Db2
- Qovery vs Instaclustr
- Qovery vs Knack
- Qovery vs LanceDB
- Qovery vs Marqo
- Qovery vs Nile
- Qovery vs Amazon Redshift
- Vitess vs Render
- Vitess vs Porter
- Vitess vs Northflank
- Vitess vs CapRover
- Vitess vs Coolify
- Vitess vs Railway
- Vitess vs Dokku
- Vitess vs Scaleway
- Vitess vs Portworx
- Vitess vs Podman
- Vitess vs containerd
- Vitess vs Encore
- Vitess vs Oracle Cloud
- Vitess vs Orca Security
- Vitess vs Packer
- Vitess vs OpenTelemetry
- Vitess vs Rook
- Vitess vs Cockroach Labs
- Vitess vs TiDB
- Vitess vs Readyset
- Vitess vs Amazon Aurora
- Vitess vs NATS
- Vitess vs PostgreSQL
- Vitess vs RabbitMQ
- Vitess vs ClickHouse
- Vitess vs Azure SQL
- Vitess vs MariaDB
- Vitess vs Oracle Database
- Vitess vs IBM Db2
- Vitess vs Instaclustr
- Vitess vs Knack
- Vitess vs LanceDB
- Vitess vs Marqo
- Vitess vs Nile
- Vitess vs Amazon Redshift
