Supabase vs Nhost: Which Backend Platform Should You Use?

This 2025 guide helps technical decision-makers choose between two leading backend-as-a-service (BaaS) platforms: Supabase and Nhost. Both target modern serverless stacks and speed up building SaaS apps, MVPs, and AI-enabled features, but they take different technical approaches. Read this if you want a practical, engineering-centric comparison that highlights where each platform shines, the trade-offs you’ll accept, and which teams are likely to prefer one over the other.

Quick Comparison

At a glance, the platforms differ in API style, developer ergonomics, and operational model. Supabase is SQL-first, Postgres-native, and offers REST/Realtime/Edge Functions as its primary interface. Nhost is GraphQL-first, built on Hasura, and emphasizes auto-generated GraphQL schemas, typed client workflows, and easy containerized extension via Nhost Run.

If you prefer working directly with Postgres, SQL, and stored procedures, Supabase is purpose-built for that flow. If your team wants a GraphQL-first experience with strong type generation and a streamlined path to containerized backend logic, Nhost is designed for that. Both offer hosted and self-hosted options, authentication, storage, and serverless functions — pick based on the API model, team skills, and long-term architecture needs.

Overview of Supabase

Supabase positions itself as an open-source Firebase alternative that is SQL-first and Postgres-based. It packages a managed Postgres database with an auto-generated REST API, real-time change feeds, storage, authentication, and edge functions into a single developer experience. The platform is opinionated around SQL: you get direct access to the underlying database, can write SQL or RPC endpoints, and leverage Postgres features (triggers, views, extensions) without an additional translation layer.

Supabase’s strengths are its maturity in the Postgres ecosystem, a large community, rich documentation, and many community templates and examples. Teams that want to own their schema, write complex SQL, or migrate from relational systems tend to find Supabase a natural fit. The real-time features are implemented as Postgres changefeeds, which feel familiar to developers who understand relational triggers and logical replication.

Overview of Nhost

Nhost is an open-source BaaS that takes a GraphQL-first approach, leveraging Hasura to expose an auto-generated, role-aware GraphQL API on top of Postgres. It focuses on developer ergonomics: automatic schema inference, strong type generation for frontend clients, and a workflow that treats GraphQL as the primary integration surface. Nhost also offers managed authentication, file storage, serverless functions, and a layer called Nhost Run for containerized custom backend services.

Nhost’s appeal is the speed of building data-driven features with GraphQL and strong TypeScript/typed client support. Teams that ship SPA or React/Next.js apps often appreciate having typed GraphQL queries and generated client code out of the box. Nhost Run gives teams an easy path to add custom logic as containers when business needs to outgrow serverless functions.

Key Differences at a Glance

Below are the practical distinctions that often drive platform choice.

• API model: Supabase favors SQL/REST and real-time changefeeds; Nhost centers on GraphQL (Hasura) with subscriptions.

• Developer workflow: Supabase encourages SQL-first workflows and direct DB access; Nhost emphasizes GraphQL schema-first development and generated types.

• Extensibility: Supabase integrates edge functions and direct Postgres extensibility; Nhost supports containerized services via Nhost Run for more complex backend logic.

• Auth & access control: Both have built-in auth flows (OAuth, magic links); Supabase exposes GoTrue-based auth while Nhost leverages Hasura’s role-based permissions model.

• Hosting and self-host: Both offer hosted plans and self-hosting options; Supabase has a larger ecosystem around managed and self-hosted Postgres.

• Community & maturity: Supabase currently enjoys a larger community footprint; Nhost is younger but designed for predictable GraphQL developer ergonomics.

• 
  

When Supabase Makes Sense

Supabase is often the right choice when your team or product requires tight control over relational data, complex SQL logic, or when Postgres-native features are integral to the application.

SQL-First Workflows

If your product relies on SQL skills, stored procedures, complex joins, or database-side logic (for example, financial apps, analytics dashboards, or systems that optimize for SQL performance), Supabase’s direct Postgres access is invaluable. You can write functions, use Postgres extensions, and lean on DB-level guarantees without translating intent through a GraphQL layer.

Rapid Prototyping & MVPs

Supabase combines the speed of a BaaS with direct DB access: for many startups, it’s easy to prototype, iterate on schema, and ship features quickly. The bundled auth, storage, and real-time features shorten the path from idea to working product, useful for hackathons, MVPs, and early releases.

Large Community & Ecosystem

A strong community translates to more examples, templates, third-party integrations, and troubleshooting resources. Supabase’s ecosystem includes many starter kits, client libraries, and community tools that accelerate adoption, especially for teams that prefer SQL or are migrating from traditional relational backends.

AI & Vector Search Support

Supabase offers native pgvector integration, enabling vector similarity search directly in Postgres. This is valuable for AI applications like semantic search, recommendation engines, and RAG (retrieval-augmented generation) pipelines. Teams building AI features can store embeddings alongside relational data without adding a separate vector database.

Why Teams Choose Nhost as They Scale

Nhost’s GraphQL-first model and containerized extension strategy appeal when teams want predictable API contracts, type safety on the client, and a clear upgrade path to custom backend services.

GraphQL-First Developer Experience

GraphQL’s auto-generated schema and Hasura’s query engine let developers iterate on data models and immediately have queries and subscriptions available. Nhost builds on this by providing generated types and client helpers, which reduce runtime type errors and make front-end development faster and less error-prone.

Extensible Backend with Nhost Run

As the product needs to grow beyond serverless functions, Nhost Run lets teams deploy containerized services alongside the managed GraphQL layer. This hybrid path is practical when business logic becomes complex — for example, when you need long-running jobs, custom background workers, or specialized binaries that don’t fit neatly into serverless functions.

Native AI Support and Advanced Features

Nhost focuses on giving developers a clean, scalable backend foundation. Instead of bundling generic “AI integrations,” it lets you plug in the tools you prefer—whether that’s a vector database, serverless functions, or external AI APIs. For AI-driven features, Nhost’s serverless functions and custom containers provide a flexible way to handle tasks like generating embeddings, storing vectors in your chosen DB, or orchestrating inference workflows without locking you into a preset stack.

In-Depth Feature Comparison

Query Language & API Approach

Supabase treats the database as the primary interface. You can use REST endpoints auto-generated from tables, call RPC (Postgres functions), or write SQL directly. Real-time subscriptions are driven by Postgres change events.

Nhost exposes an auto-generated GraphQL API powered by Hasura. The schema directly reflects your database and relationships, and GraphQL subscriptions provide real-time behavior. GraphQL’s strengths are strong client-side tooling and precise selectivity for queries, which can reduce overfetching.

Authentication & Access Control

Both platforms support common auth flows: email/password, OAuth providers, and magic links. Supabase’s GoTrue-based auth is straightforward and integrates with RLS (Row Level Security) patterns in Postgres. Nhost combines its auth with Hasura’s role-based permissions model, which is powerful for fine-grained GraphQL access rules across types and fields.

Hosting, Deployment & Infrastructure Control

Supabase offers managed hosting and easy self-hosting options. It puts Postgres front and center, so teams with DBA needs or complex backup/restore requirements will find familiar primitives and tools.

Nhost manages Hasura and related stack components and also provides self-hosted options. The distinct benefit for Nhost is that the GraphQL API is tightly integrated with the dev experience, and extensions via containers feel like a natural progression.

Community, Maturity & Licensing

Supabase’s larger community means more tutorials, templates, and third-party integrations. Nhost’s community is smaller but focused on GraphQL patterns and developer ergonomics. Both are open source, enabling self-host and vendor escape hatches — an important consideration for long-term resilience.

Which One Should You Choose?

The right choice depends on developer skills, product requirements, and long-term architecture plans.

Small Teams or Simple Apps

If your app is a typical CRUD product, early-stage SaaS, or a prototype where speed matters and your team is comfortable with SQL, Supabase is a pragmatic choice. It offers fast time-to-market and straightforward Postgres operations.

Growing Teams with Complex Needs

If your product roadmap anticipates complex client-side interactions, a heavy reliance on real-time subscriptions via GraphQL, or an inevitable need for containerized backend logic, Nhost can be a better fit. Its GraphQL-first UX and Nhost Run path ease the transition from simple BaaS to a more bespoke backend.

Migration Considerations

Switching between these platforms is possible but non-trivial. Migrating from Supabase to Nhost often means translating SQL-centred workflows into GraphQL patterns and rethinking access control in Hasura’s permissions model.

Going the other way may require consolidating GraphQL queries into SQL or RPC endpoints and possibly reworking client code that relies on GraphQL type generation. Evaluate vendor lock-in, data export capabilities, and test migrations in staging before committing.

Conclusion

Both Supabase and Nhost are capable, modern BaaS platforms that reduce boilerplate and speed development. Choose Supabase when you prefer direct Postgres control, SQL-first workflows, and a mature community ecosystem.

Choose Nhost when you want a GraphQL-first developer experience, strongly typed client workflows, and an easy upgrade path to containerized backend services. For many teams, the ideal approach is pragmatic experimentation: prototype on one platform, validate your core flows, and then codify a migration or hybrid plan if your needs outgrow the initial choice. You can also reach out to us to discuss your project needs and see how our approach can fit into your vision.

FAQs

Can I migrate from Firebase to Supabase or Nhost without downtime?

Zero downtime is difficult but achievable with careful planning. Use phased migration: replicate data to the new backend, dual-write or read-through proxies during cutover, and switch traffic in small increments. Test the migration strategy in staging and automate rollbacks.

How do real-time subscriptions compare between the two?

Supabase uses Postgres changefeeds for real-time updates, which map directly to SQL changes. Nhost uses Hasura’s GraphQL subscriptions, which provide a schema-centric, client-friendly subscription model. Both work well; choose based on whether you prefer a SQL or GraphQL subscription surface.

What happens to my data if Supabase or Nhost shuts down?

Both platforms are open source and support self-hosting, so you can export your Postgres data and run it elsewhere. Keep backups and export strategies in place. Prefer standard Postgres features (logical backups, dumps) to avoid vendor lock-in.

Can I use Supabase’s database with Nhost’s auth (or vice versa)?

Technically possible but not recommended for production. Combining services increases operational complexity and undermines the benefits of an integrated platform (single permission model, consistent lifecycle). If you do mix, plan for additional glue logic and thorough testing.