Software · head to head
Sync.com vs Wasabi

Sync.com
Software
Cloud storage, backup and sharing with end-to-end encryption
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Sync.com all Teams plans require a minimum of 3 users; Wasabi 90-day minimum storage duration with no option to delete before full period without penalty
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Sync.com and Wasabi actually diverge.
Identical on both: free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Unknown).
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 Sync.com
Nothing recorded that Wasabi does not also cover.
Only in Wasabi
- Hot Cloud Storage
- S3 Compatible API
- Object Lock
- Versioning
- Multi-region
- Data Migration Tools
- Immutability
- Ransomware Protection
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Sync.com
No use cases recorded yet. See the Sync.com review.
Wasabi
- Backup and recoverynot Sync.com
- Media storagenot Sync.com
- Archive replacementnot Sync.com
- Ransomware protectionnot Sync.com
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Sync.com
- All Teams plans require a minimum of 3 users
- The advertised low monthly rate (e.g. $4/month for Teams 1TB) is a promotional annual rate described as 50% off; the standard monthly price is $8/month without the promotion
- Enterprise pricing for 100+ users is custom and requires contacting a dedicated account manager
Wasabi
- 90-day minimum storage duration with no option to delete before full period without penalty
- Significantly smaller global footprint than AWS with only 16 regions, resulting in higher latency for users in underserved regions
- Performance can degrade with high-volume transactions requiring throughput management strategies
- Hot storage only, no cold/archival storage tier for long-term data at lower cost
- Support responsiveness gaps with teams experiencing multi-day waits for critical issue resolution
Pricing, plan by plan
Sync.com
On requestNo published plan breakdown. See the Sync.com review.
Wasabi
$7.99/monthNo published plan breakdown. See the Wasabi review.
Which should you pick?
Choose Sync.com if
Nothing in the data separates Sync.com from Wasabi on the points above - pick on price and on how each one feels to use.
Choose Wasabi if
- You need hot cloud storage.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want s3 compatible api.
Questions people ask
- Is Sync.com or Wasabi better?
- Neither clearly leads. Sync.com starts at On request and Wasabi at $7.99/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Sync.com or Wasabi?
- Sync.com starts at On request and Wasabi at $7.99/month.
- Does Sync.com or Wasabi run on more platforms?
- Sync.com runs on Web. Wasabi runs on Web, API.
- What can Sync.com do that Wasabi cannot?
- Wasabi covers Hot Cloud Storage, S3 Compatible API, Object Lock, Versioning.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Wasabi: What is Wasabi's pricing structure?
Wasabi offers pay-as-you-go pricing at $7.99 per TB per month as of July 2026, with no egress or API request fees. Reserved capacity plans are available for multi-year terms with volume discounts.
SourceWasabi: Does Wasabi charge for data downloads or API calls?
No. Wasabi includes zero egress fees and zero API request fees, which is a major cost advantage over AWS S3. Customers can plan their budget to the penny without worrying about surprise data transfer charges.
SourceWasabi: Is there a minimum storage duration requirement?
Yes. Wasabi enforces a 90-day minimum storage term. Users who delete data before 90 days are still charged for the full 90-day period.
SourceWasabi: Is Wasabi S3-compatible?
Yes. Wasabi Hot Cloud Storage is fully S3-compatible, meaning organizations can integrate it into existing workflows without rewriting application code used with AWS S3.
Related pages
Keep looking
Other head to heads
- Sync.com vs Veeam Backup & Replication
- Sync.com vs Carbonite
- Sync.com vs Backblaze
- Sync.com vs Barracuda Backup
- Sync.com vs Arq Backup
- Sync.com vs CrashPlan
- Sync.com vs Duplicati
- Sync.com vs Zerto
- Sync.com vs Box
- Sync.com vs IDrive
- Sync.com vs Microsoft OneDrive
- Sync.com vs Nextcloud
- Sync.com vs pCloud
- Sync.com vs Tresorit
- Sync.com vs TrueNAS
- Sync.com vs Veritas NetBackup
- Sync.com vs Grafana Cloud
- Sync.com vs Neon
- Sync.com vs DigitalOcean
- Sync.com vs AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Sync.com vs Lambda (AWS Serverless)
- Sync.com vs Deno Deploy
- Sync.com vs Heroku
- Sync.com vs Hetzner Cloud
- Sync.com vs Linode
- Sync.com vs Packer
- Sync.com vs Pulumi
- Sync.com vs Render
- Sync.com vs Upstash
- Sync.com vs Vagrant
- Sync.com vs Vultr
- Sync.com vs Akamai
- Sync.com vs Alibaba Cloud
- Sync.com vs Chef
- Wasabi vs Veeam Backup & Replication
- Wasabi vs Carbonite
- Wasabi vs Backblaze
- Wasabi vs Barracuda Backup
- Wasabi vs Arq Backup
- Wasabi vs CrashPlan
- Wasabi vs Duplicati
- Wasabi vs Zerto
- Wasabi vs Box
- Wasabi vs IDrive
- Wasabi vs Microsoft OneDrive
- Wasabi vs Nextcloud
- Wasabi vs pCloud
- Wasabi vs Tresorit
- Wasabi vs TrueNAS
- Wasabi vs Veritas NetBackup
- Wasabi vs Grafana Cloud
- Wasabi vs Neon
- Wasabi vs DigitalOcean
- Wasabi vs AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Wasabi vs Lambda (AWS Serverless)
- Wasabi vs Deno Deploy
- Wasabi vs Heroku
- Wasabi vs Hetzner Cloud
- Wasabi vs Linode
- Wasabi vs Packer
- Wasabi vs Pulumi
- Wasabi vs Render
- Wasabi vs Upstash
- Wasabi vs Vagrant
- Wasabi vs Vultr
- Wasabi vs Akamai
- Wasabi vs Alibaba Cloud
- Wasabi vs Chef

