Developer Tools · head to head
Soketi vs Zeta
Soketi
Developer Tools
Self-hosted, Pusher-compatible WebSockets server with a stalled maintenance record
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
Zeta
Technology
Cloud native credit card processing and core banking from Bhavin Turakhia's Zeta
- From
- On request
- Free plan
- No
The short version
- Only Soketi has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Soketi maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.; Zeta it competes against card processors with decades of production track record, and in card processing an outage is a public event, so a shorter operational history is a genuine risk factor rather than a technicality.
- They diverge on capability: Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility, Zeta covers Tachyon card processing.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Soketi and Zeta 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 Soketi
- Pusher protocol compatibility
- Presence and private channels
- Horizontal scaling
- App management backends
- Webhooks
- Prometheus metrics
Only in Zeta
- Tachyon card processing
- Real time authorisation
- Rewards and offers engine
- Core banking modules
- Programme configuration
- Mobile and web SDKs
- Fraud and controls
- Cloud deployment
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Soketi
- A Laravel application that already uses Echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime providernot Zeta
- Realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasonsnot Zeta
- A local or CI environment that needs a Pusher-compatible server without hitting a paid accountnot Zeta
- A high-connection-count application where hosted per-connection pricing has become the largest line in the infrastructure billnot Zeta
Zeta
- A United States bank whose card platform makes launching a new rewards product a multi quarter vendor projectnot Soketi
- An issuer that wants authorisation level controls and real time data rather than end of day filesnot Soketi
- A large fintech launching a credit card programme at scale with custom product logicnot Soketi
- A bank consolidating card and deposit processing onto one modern platformnot Soketi
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Soketi
- Maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
- Dependency drift on Node and uWebSockets.js will eventually force you to fork or migrate, and that cost is unbudgeted at the point you adopt it.
- There is no commercial support to buy, so a production incident at three in the morning is entirely your problem with no escalation path.
- Scaling beyond a single node needs Redis and careful configuration, and getting presence channels correct across nodes is a genuine source of subtle bugs.
- It implements the Pusher protocol rather than tracking it, so any protocol feature Pusher adds later will not appear, and the compatibility guarantee slowly decays.
Zeta
- It competes against card processors with decades of production track record, and in card processing an outage is a public event, so a shorter operational history is a genuine risk factor rather than a technicality.
- Contracts are enterprise scale and quoted with volume minimums, which puts it out of reach of small issuers who would otherwise benefit most from modern tooling.
- A card portfolio migration runs twelve to twenty four months at minimum, during which the issuer runs two platforms and pays for both.
- Zeta is a processor rather than a licence holder, so network membership, BIN sponsorship and regulatory obligations remain entirely with the issuer.
- Public references for large live United States production volumes are fewer than the announcements imply, so diligence should insist on active account counts and uptime history rather than partnership press releases.
Pricing, plan by plan
Soketi
Free- SoketiFree
- MIT licensed
- Unlimited connections subject to your own hardware
- No vendor billing
Zeta
On request- Tachyon platform$undefined/year
- Quoted per institution, commonly on active accounts or transaction volume
- Implementation for a card portfolio migration measured in quarters to years
- Minimum volume commitments typical on enterprise contracts
Which should you pick?
Choose Soketi if
- You need pusher protocol compatibility.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
- You also want presence and private channels.
Choose Zeta if
- You need tachyon card processing.
- You work on Web, API, Cloud, iOS, Android.
- You also want real time authorisation.
Questions people ask
- Is Soketi or Zeta better?
- Neither clearly leads. Soketi starts at Free and Zeta at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Soketi or Zeta?
- Soketi has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Soketi and On request for Zeta.
- Does Soketi or Zeta run on more platforms?
- Soketi runs on Linux, macOS, Windows. Zeta runs on Web, API, Cloud, iOS, Android.
- Can I use Soketi for free?
- Yes. Soketi has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Zeta starts at On request.
- What is Soketi best used for?
- Soketi is most often used for a laravel application that already uses echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime provider, realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasons, a local or ci environment that needs a pusher-compatible server without hitting a paid account, a high-connection-count application where hosted per-connection pricing has become the largest line in the infrastructure bill. Of those, a laravel application that already uses echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime provider and realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasons are not what Zeta is typically brought in for.
- What can Soketi do that Zeta cannot?
- Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility, Presence and private channels, Horizontal scaling, App management backends. Zeta covers Tachyon card processing, Real time authorisation, Rewards and offers engine, Core banking modules.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Soketi: Is Soketi still maintained?
Barely. The maintainer has stated that available time is very limited and releases have been sparse; treat it as community-maintained.
Zeta: Which Zeta is this?
The banking technology company founded by Bhavin Turakhia, which builds the Tachyon card processing and core banking platform. Not any similarly named payroll or accounting product.
Soketi: Do I need to change my client code?
No. Pusher client SDKs and Laravel Echo work by changing the host, port and credentials.
Zeta: What is its strongest use case?
United States credit card issuing and processing, where legacy platforms make product changes slow and expensive.
Soketi: What does it cost?
Nothing in licence fees. It is MIT licensed; you pay for the server it runs on.
Zeta: Does Zeta provide the BIN or licence?
No. It processes. Network membership, BIN sponsorship and regulatory obligations stay with the issuer.
Soketi: What are people moving to?
Laravel Reverb for Laravel applications, and Sockudo, a Rust reimplementation, for others.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Soketi vs PartyKit
- Soketi vs Penpot
- Soketi vs Atlantis
- Soketi vs Coder
- Soketi vs Backstage
- Soketi vs Xlinesoft
- Soketi vs Bazel
- Soketi vs Eclipse IDE
- Soketi vs Pants Build
- Soketi vs Ansible
- Soketi vs Helix
- Soketi vs Jitsu
- Soketi vs Avo
- Soketi vs Azure DevOps
- Soketi vs Bitbucket
- Soketi vs Claude Code
- Soketi vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- Soketi vs Finxact
- Soketi vs Thought Machine
- Soketi vs Alkami
- Soketi vs Apache Spark
- Soketi vs Nagios XI
- Soketi vs Shortcut
- Soketi vs Linear
- Soketi vs Datadog
- Soketi vs Greenhouse
- Soketi vs Google Chrome
- Soketi vs Mozilla Firefox
- Soketi vs Confluent Cloud
- Soketi vs Heap
- Soketi vs Microsoft Edge
- Soketi vs Netlify
- Soketi vs Productboard
- Soketi vs Sentry
- Soketi vs Trino
- Zeta vs PartyKit
- Zeta vs Penpot
- Zeta vs Atlantis
- Zeta vs Coder
- Zeta vs Backstage
- Zeta vs Xlinesoft
- Zeta vs Bazel
- Zeta vs Eclipse IDE
- Zeta vs Pants Build
- Zeta vs Ansible
- Zeta vs Helix
- Zeta vs Jitsu
- Zeta vs Avo
- Zeta vs Azure DevOps
- Zeta vs Bitbucket
- Zeta vs Claude Code
- Zeta vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- Zeta vs Finxact
- Zeta vs Thought Machine
- Zeta vs Alkami
- Zeta vs Apache Spark
- Zeta vs Nagios XI
- Zeta vs Shortcut
- Zeta vs Linear
- Zeta vs Datadog
- Zeta vs Greenhouse
- Zeta vs Google Chrome
- Zeta vs Mozilla Firefox
- Zeta vs Confluent Cloud
- Zeta vs Heap
- Zeta vs Microsoft Edge
- Zeta vs Netlify
- Zeta vs Productboard
- Zeta vs Sentry
- Zeta vs Trino