Research · head to head
Terra vs Wasabi

Terra
Research
Open biomedical research platform for genomic analysis, priced only by the cloud you consume
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Terra has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Terra the absence of a licence fee hides the real cost driver: an idle notebook virtual machine left running overnight, or a workspace bucket full of intermediate workflow outputs, quietly consumes grant money with no vendor invoice to prompt a review.; Wasabi 90-day minimum storage duration with no option to delete before full period without penalty
- They diverge on capability: Terra covers No platform licence fee, Wasabi covers Hot Cloud Storage.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Terra and Wasabi 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 Terra
- No platform licence fee
- Cloud pass-through billing
- WDL workflow execution
- Notebook environments
- Controlled-access data
- Workspace sharing
- Compliance posture
- Multi-cloud
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.
Terra
- A genomics lab running whole-genome alignment and variant calling pipelines without provisioning or maintaining a local clusternot Wasabi
- A consortium sharing controlled-access human data across institutions where the data cannot be copied to each sitenot Wasabi
- A health system analysing patient genomic data under a HIPAA business associate agreementnot Wasabi
- A federal or federally funded project needing FedRAMP Moderate authorisation for its analysis environmentnot Wasabi
Wasabi
- Backup and recoverynot Terra
- Media storagenot Terra
- Archive replacementnot Terra
- Ransomware protectionnot Terra
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Terra
- The absence of a licence fee hides the real cost driver: an idle notebook virtual machine left running overnight, or a workspace bucket full of intermediate workflow outputs, quietly consumes grant money with no vendor invoice to prompt a review.
- Cost governance is entirely the customer responsibility, and grant-funded groups without a cloud engineer routinely overspend before anyone reads the Google or Azure bill in enough detail to find the cause.
- It assumes genuine bioinformatics competence: writing or adapting WDL workflows, managing data tables and debugging failed tasks are all on you, so a wet lab without computational staff cannot use it productively.
- Feature parity between the Google Cloud and Azure deployments is not identical, so a decision on cloud provider constrains which capabilities and datasets you can reach and is expensive to reverse later.
- It is a research platform rather than a regulated clinical system: it is not a validated GxP environment and does not carry the qualification package a diagnostic or submission workflow would require, so clinical use needs additional infrastructure and validation you provide yourself.
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
Terra
Free- Terra platformFree
- No charge for the platform, administration, security controls or frontline support
- Workspaces, workflow execution and notebook environments included
- Available on Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure
- Cloud consumption$undefined/month
- Google Cloud or Azure charges passed through at cost with no markup
- Running notebook virtual machines around 0.22 USD per hour, roughly 0.027 USD per hour when paused
- Storage billed continuously on workspace buckets and intermediate workflow outputs
Wasabi
$7.99/monthNo published plan breakdown. See the Wasabi review.
Which should you pick?
Choose Terra if
- You need no platform licence fee.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure.
- You also want cloud pass-through billing.
Choose Wasabi if
- You need hot cloud storage.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want s3 compatible api.
Questions people ask
- Is Terra or Wasabi better?
- Neither clearly leads. Terra starts at Free and Wasabi at $7.99/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Terra or Wasabi?
- Terra has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Terra and $7.99/month for Wasabi.
- Does Terra or Wasabi run on more platforms?
- Terra runs on Web, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure. Wasabi runs on Web, API.
- Can I use Terra for free?
- Yes. Terra has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Wasabi starts at $7.99/month.
- What is Terra best used for?
- Terra is most often used for a genomics lab running whole-genome alignment and variant calling pipelines without provisioning or maintaining a local cluster, a consortium sharing controlled-access human data across institutions where the data cannot be copied to each site, a health system analysing patient genomic data under a hipaa business associate agreement, a federal or federally funded project needing fedramp moderate authorisation for its analysis environment. Of those, a genomics lab running whole-genome alignment and variant calling pipelines without provisioning or maintaining a local cluster and a consortium sharing controlled-access human data across institutions where the data cannot be copied to each site are not what Wasabi is typically brought in for.
- What can Terra do that Wasabi cannot?
- Terra covers No platform licence fee, Cloud pass-through billing, WDL workflow execution, Notebook environments. Wasabi covers Hot Cloud Storage, S3 Compatible API, Object Lock, Versioning.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Terra: Is Terra really free?
The platform is. There is no licence fee. Everything you pay is Google Cloud or Azure compute, storage and egress, passed through at cost.
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.
SourceTerra: What actually drives the bill?
Running virtual machines and stored data. Pausing notebooks drops a virtual machine from about 0.22 to about 0.027 dollars an hour, and deleting intermediate workflow outputs is the other main saving.
Wasabi: 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.
SourceTerra: Can I use it with protected health information?
Yes. Terra signs HIPAA business associate agreements and GDPR data processing agreements, and the Azure deployment holds FedRAMP Moderate authorisation.
Wasabi: 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.
SourceTerra: Is it validated for clinical or GxP use?
No. It is a research platform. Regulated clinical or submission workflows need validation and controls you build yourself.
Wasabi: 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
Other head to heads
- Terra vs Benchling
- Terra vs DNAnexus
- Terra vs Seven Bridges
- Terra vs Dotmatics
- Terra vs Form Bio
- Terra vs Medidata Rave
- Terra vs Aurelius
- Terra vs Genedata
- Terra vs Valispace
- Terra vs Sapio Sciences
- Terra vs Castor EDC
- Terra vs Reduct
- Terra vs SurveySparrow
- Terra vs Contentsquare
- Terra vs LabArchives
- Terra vs NVivo
- Terra vs GWI
- Terra vs AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Terra vs DigitalOcean
- Terra vs Hetzner Cloud
- Terra vs Scaleway
- Terra vs Linode
- Terra vs Vultr
- Terra vs Zeabur
- Terra vs Porter
- Terra vs Contabo
- Terra vs Encore
- Terra vs Google Cloud Platform
- Terra vs Microsoft Azure
- Terra vs HAProxy
- Terra vs IBM Cloud
- Terra vs kind
- Terra vs Koyeb
- Terra vs Kustomize
- Terra vs Linkerd
- Wasabi vs Benchling
- Wasabi vs DNAnexus
- Wasabi vs Seven Bridges
- Wasabi vs Dotmatics
- Wasabi vs Form Bio
- Wasabi vs Medidata Rave
- Wasabi vs Aurelius
- Wasabi vs Genedata
- Wasabi vs Valispace
- Wasabi vs Sapio Sciences
- Wasabi vs Castor EDC
- Wasabi vs Reduct
- Wasabi vs SurveySparrow
- Wasabi vs Contentsquare
- Wasabi vs LabArchives
- Wasabi vs NVivo
- Wasabi vs GWI
- Wasabi vs AWS (Amazon Web Services)
- Wasabi vs DigitalOcean
- Wasabi vs Hetzner Cloud
- Wasabi vs Scaleway
- Wasabi vs Linode
- Wasabi vs Vultr
- Wasabi vs Zeabur
- Wasabi vs Porter
- Wasabi vs Contabo
- Wasabi vs Encore
- Wasabi vs Google Cloud Platform
- Wasabi vs Microsoft Azure
- Wasabi vs HAProxy
- Wasabi vs IBM Cloud
- Wasabi vs kind
- Wasabi vs Koyeb
- Wasabi vs Kustomize
- Wasabi vs Linkerd

