Appwrite vs PocketBase: which one to choose in 2026?
Both are open source alternatives to Firebase. We compare license, tech stack and features to help you decide which fits your team best.
| Appwrite | PocketBase | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dev Tools | Dev Tools |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | MIT |
| GitHub stars | ~47k | ~40k |
| Tech stack | PHP, MariaDB, Redis | Go, SQLite |
| Replaces | Firebase | Firebase |
Appwrite has more GitHub stars, which usually indicates a larger community (not necessarily that it's the best option for your use case).
Appwrite
Multi-language backend-as-a-service, an alternative to Firebase.
Pros
- Carefully crafted cross-platform developer experience
Things to consider
- Stack with several internal containers, heavier to audit
PocketBase
Backend-as-a-service in a single binary, a minimal alternative to Firebase.
Pros
- Auth, storage and database in a single binary, no separate pieces to coordinate
Things to consider
- SQLite limits horizontal scalability at high volume
Key features
Appwrite
- SDKs for Flutter, Swift, Android, Web and more
- Serverless functions in multiple runtimes
- Very complete control panel
PocketBase
- Auth, storage and database in one binary
- Realtime API over WebSockets
- Admin panel included
Already know which one you prefer?
Add it to your Stack Builder and generate a ready-to-deploy docker-compose.yml alongside the rest of your stack.
Go to Stack Builder