File Storage · head to head
Storj vs VAST Data
Storj
File Storage
S3-compatible object storage distributed in encrypted pieces across independently operated nodes
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
VAST Data
File Storage
All-flash storage designed to make hard disk tiers unnecessary
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Storj has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Storj billing includes a per segment charge and every object consumes at least one segment, so a bucket holding millions of small files can cost several times what the four dollar per terabyte headline implies.; VAST Data data reduction ratios drive the economics, and datasets that are already compressed, such as media or encrypted files, reduce poorly and destroy the cost per terabyte case.
- They diverge on capability: Storj covers Erasure coded distribution, VAST Data covers Disaggregated architecture.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Storj and VAST Data actually diverge.
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (File Storage).
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 Storj
- Erasure coded distribution
- Client side encryption
- S3-compatible gateway
- Native uplink access
- Object Lock and versioning
- Storj Select
Only in VAST Data
- Disaggregated architecture
- Similarity-based reduction
- All-flash single tier
- Multi-protocol access
- Wide erasure coding
- GPU-oriented throughput
- Snapshots and replication
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Storj
- An offsite backup or archive target where the data is large, written once and occasionally restorednot VAST Data
- Serving large media files internationally without paying hyperscaler egress ratesnot VAST Data
- Storing data where the objection to AWS, Azure or Google is jurisdiction and concentration rather than costnot VAST Data
- A second, independent copy of a dataset that already lives in a hyperscaler bucketnot VAST Data
VAST Data
- A GPU training cluster where storage throughput, not compute, is the bottleneck on job completionnot Storj
- A genomics group holding petabytes of sequencing output that must stay immediately readable rather than archived to tapenot Storj
- A quantitative finance team running backtests over historical market data that a disk tier cannot serve fast enoughnot Storj
- An organisation consolidating a fast tier and an archive tier into one system to reduce rack space and power drawnot Storj
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Storj
- Billing includes a per segment charge and every object consumes at least one segment, so a bucket holding millions of small files can cost several times what the four dollar per terabyte headline implies.
- Reconstructing an object requires responses from dozens of independent nodes, so time to first byte is noticeably higher than a centralised bucket and it is a poor fit behind a latency sensitive read path.
- Performance depends on the mix of node operators serving you at that moment rather than on a datacentre you can raise a ticket against, so slow reads are diagnosed statistically rather than fixed.
- The hosted S3 gateway terminates encryption on Storj infrastructure, so using the convenient access path gives up the end to end encryption that is the main architectural argument for the service.
- The S3 gateway is compatible rather than identical, so tools that lean on less common API calls, multipart edge cases or unusual header behaviour need testing before you commit a workload to it.
VAST Data
- Data reduction ratios drive the economics, and datasets that are already compressed, such as media or encrypted files, reduce poorly and destroy the cost per terabyte case.
- There is a minimum viable cluster size, so the entry cost is high and the platform is not sensible for a small footprint however attractive the architecture is.
- Pricing is quoted against effective capacity after reduction, which means the price you signed depends on an assumption about your own data that only becomes measurable after deployment.
- The platform has expanded into database and data catalogue functions, which broadens the roadmap but means buyers evaluating it as a file system must be careful not to be sold an adjacent product they will not use.
- As a relatively young vendor in a market of long-lived incumbents, buyers with ten year retention requirements should press on long term support commitments and hardware availability rather than assume them.
Pricing, plan by plan
Storj
Free- Free trialFree
- 25 GB stored
- 25 GB egress per month
- No card required to start
- Storj$4/month
- 4 USD per terabyte stored per month
- 7 USD per terabyte of egress
- Per segment fee on top of stored volume
VAST Data
On request- VAST Data Platform$undefined/year
- Priced per usable capacity after data reduction
- Hardware and software sold together or via certified partners
- Subscription and capital purchase options
Which should you pick?
Choose Storj if
- You need erasure coded distribution.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, API, Linux, macOS, Windows.
- You also want client side encryption.
Choose VAST Data if
- You need disaggregated architecture.
- You work on Linux.
- You also want similarity-based reduction.
Questions people ask
- Is Storj or VAST Data better?
- Neither clearly leads. Storj starts at Free and VAST Data at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Storj or VAST Data?
- Storj has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Storj and On request for VAST Data.
- Does Storj or VAST Data run on more platforms?
- Storj runs on Web, API, Linux, macOS, Windows. VAST Data runs on Linux.
- Can I use Storj for free?
- Yes. Storj has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. VAST Data starts at On request.
- What is Storj best used for?
- Storj is most often used for an offsite backup or archive target where the data is large, written once and occasionally restored, serving large media files internationally without paying hyperscaler egress rates, storing data where the objection to aws, azure or google is jurisdiction and concentration rather than cost, a second, independent copy of a dataset that already lives in a hyperscaler bucket. Of those, an offsite backup or archive target where the data is large, written once and occasionally restored and serving large media files internationally without paying hyperscaler egress rates are not what VAST Data is typically brought in for.
- What can Storj do that VAST Data cannot?
- Storj covers Erasure coded distribution, Client side encryption, S3-compatible gateway, Native uplink access. VAST Data covers Disaggregated architecture, Similarity-based reduction, All-flash single tier, Multi-protocol access.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Storj: Why is my bill higher than four dollars per terabyte?
Almost always the per segment fee. Objects are split into segments and small files each consume one, so a few million tiny objects generate a segment charge that dwarfs the storage line.
VAST Data: Do we still need an archive tier?
That is the central claim, and it holds when your data reduces well. Run a reduction assessment on your actual dataset before accepting the economics.
Storj: Can node operators read my data?
No. Files are encrypted client side and each operator holds only an erasure coded fragment, which is not a readable portion of the file.
VAST Data: How is capacity priced?
On usable capacity after data reduction, quoted rather than published. That makes the reduction ratio assumption the most important number in the contract.
Storj: Is there a minimum retention period?
No. You are billed for what you store while you store it, unlike several competitors that bill a ninety day minimum whatever you delete.
VAST Data: Is it suitable for a small deployment?
No. There is a minimum cluster size and the entry cost reflects it. Small footprints are better served elsewhere.
Storj: Is it fast enough to serve a website from?
For large files with parallel reads, yes. For many small objects where time to first byte matters, put a CDN in front of it or use something centralised.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Storj vs Cloudflare R2
- Storj vs Backblaze
- Storj vs Scality RING
- Storj vs IDrive e2
- Storj vs Cloudian
- Storj vs MinIO
- Storj vs Tigris
- Storj vs Ceph
- Storj vs Panzura
- Storj vs TrueNAS
- Storj vs Duplicati
- Storj vs LucidLink
- Storj vs pCloud
- Storj vs Sync.com
- Storj vs Nasuni
- Storj vs Veeam Backup & Replication
- Storj vs CrashPlan
- Storj vs Microsoft OneDrive
- Storj vs Tresorit
- Storj vs Veritas NetBackup
- Storj vs Box
- Storj vs Google Drive
- Storj vs IDrive
- VAST Data vs Cloudflare R2
- VAST Data vs Backblaze
- VAST Data vs Scality RING
- VAST Data vs IDrive e2
- VAST Data vs Cloudian
- VAST Data vs MinIO
- VAST Data vs Tigris
- VAST Data vs Ceph
- VAST Data vs Panzura
- VAST Data vs TrueNAS
- VAST Data vs Duplicati
- VAST Data vs LucidLink
- VAST Data vs pCloud
- VAST Data vs Sync.com
- VAST Data vs Nasuni
- VAST Data vs Veeam Backup & Replication
- VAST Data vs CrashPlan
- VAST Data vs Microsoft OneDrive
- VAST Data vs Tresorit
- VAST Data vs Veritas NetBackup
- VAST Data vs Box
- VAST Data vs Google Drive
- VAST Data vs IDrive