Supabase vs Firebase: The Ultimate Tech Stack Guide for Independent Developers

Introduction: Why Your Tech Stack Choices Keep "Stepping on Landmines"
As an independent developer, have you ever encountered these 👇 scenarios?

• In the early stages, you used Firebase to launch quickly, but when user volume surged, your bill skyrocketed 10x...
• You tried implementing complex business logic with NoSQL, only to end up with code that’s a "patchwork nightmare"...
• You wanted to migrate to a self-hosted architecture, but found your data locked in by the vendor, with export costs outrageously high...
  Firebase and Supabase both seem like "one-stop BaaS solutions", but they differ critically in usability, scalability, and cost models.
  This article provides a 7-module comparison + real-world migration code tests to help you choose the right tech stack once and for all, avoiding "architecture crashes" in million-dollar projects.

1. The "Life-or-Death Line" of Tech Selection: 4 Core Factors

1.1. Development Costs

• Firebase: The free tier seems generous, but costs grow exponentially once you hit "read/write operation" limits.
• Supabase: Based on Postgres, it charges by storage, with CPU/IOPS resources isolated, leading to more linear cost scaling.

1.2. Technical Debt Traps

• Firebase: Data models are tightly coupled to document structures, requiring business logic rewrites for migration to relational databases.
• Supabase: Built on standard Postgres, it supports one-click SQL backups, avoiding vendor lock-in.

1.3. Architecture Fit

• NoSQL (Firebase): Ideal for rapid iteration in lightweight, interactive scenarios (e.g., chatrooms, social feeds).
• SQL (Supabase): Strong transaction guarantees and multi-table JOINs make it perfect for complex systems like orders and inventory.

1.4. Long-Term Viability

• Firebase: Relies on the Google ecosystem, but core features haven’t seen major updates in years.
• Supabase: Driven by an open-source community, it added critical modules like S3-compatible storage and Edge Functions in 2023.

---

2. Feature Showdown: Real Performance from Database to Edge Computing

2.1. Data Storage: NoSQL Flexibility vs. SQL Rigor

• Firebase Firestore:
  • Strengths: Nested document structures naturally align with JSON, enabling real-time chat in 10 seconds.
  • Pain Points: No cross-collection transactions; complex queries require multiple read operations.

• Supabase PostgreSQL:
  • Killer Feature: JSONB fields support NoSQL-style writes while enabling ACID transactions.
  • Performance Test: JOIN queries on a 100K-order table with response times stable at 20ms.

2.2. User Authentication: Whose Permission Controls Are More "Painless"?

• Firebase Auth:
  • Quick social login integration, but custom permissions require writing complex security rules (e.g., restricting users to their own data takes 20 lines of DSL code).
• Supabase Auth:
  • RLS (Row-Level Security): Permissions controlled with pure SQL, as shown below:

    CREATE POLICY user_access ON messages  
    USING (sender_id = current_user_id()); -- One line for data isolation  
    

2.3. Serverless Functions: Cold Start Latency Determines User Experience

• Firebase Cloud Functions:
  • Multi-language support, but Node.js cold starts take 2-5 seconds.
  • Costs spiral in high-frequency scenarios ($40 per million invocations).
• Supabase Edge Functions:
  • Based on Deno runtime, cold starts <100ms, ideal for real-time interactions.
  • Free tier includes 100K invocations, zero cost for small-to-medium projects.

2.4. "Does Supabase Really Outperform Firebase, or Is It Just Official Hype?"

• Supabase Official Benchmarks:
  • Read Operations: 4x Firebase’s requests per second.
  • Write Operations: 3.1x Firebase’s throughput.
• Developer-Verified Tests:

  # Using k6 stress testing tool (1,000 concurrent users)  
  Firestore write latency: avg 320ms | p95 850ms  
  Supabase write latency: avg 98ms  | p95 210ms  
  

2.5. Jake Prins’ Test Conclusions

• Development Speed: Firebase is 20% faster for initial setup, but Supabase is 50% more efficient for later iterations.
• Critical Pain Points:
  • Firebase: No cross-document transactions; e-commerce inventory deductions require complex compensation logic.
  • Supabase: Occasional Docker compatibility issues during local debugging (M1 chip users beware).

---

3. Cost Models: Why Firebase’s "Free Lunch" Is the Most Expensive

3.1. The Trap Behind the Free Tier

• Firebase:
  • 50K daily read operations ≈ 0.57 requests/second → A single homepage load can exceed limits.
  • 2GB monthly database storage → 20% user growth triggers immediate scaling.
  • Auth service free for first 50K requests, then $0.0055 per request.
  • Firebase phone authentication requires Twilio integration, adding 30% to costs.
• Supabase:
  • Free tier supports 10K active users, including database, storage, and functions.
  • Paid tiers scale affordably (e.g., $25/month for 50GB storage, 1/3 of Firebase’s price).
  • Auth service free for first 100K requests, then $0.00325 per request.

3.2. Cost Comparison for Mid-Sized Apps (100K MAU)

Module	Firebase	Supabase	Cost Difference Source
Database	$220	$75	Firestore’s read/write-based billing
File Storage	$180	$25	Supabase’s direct S3 low-cost storage
Function Execution	$150	$0	Supabase’s free tier covers it
Total	$550	$100	Supabase saves 81%

---

4. Developer Experience: Whose Toolchain Is More "Brainless"?

4.1. Local Development Efficiency

• Firebase:
  • Requires Java environment for Emulator, with cumbersome setup.
  • Debugging security rules requires repeated cloud deployments.
• Supabase:
  • One command to start the local environment:

    supabase start  
    

  • Real-time syncing of remote schema changes, supporting GitOps workflows.

4.2. Ecosystem Integration Freedom

• Firebase:
  • Deeply tied to GCP; BigQuery analytics require additional fees.
  • No log exports to third-party monitoring tools.
• Supabase:
  • Seamless deployment with Vercel/Netlify.
  • Direct connections to BI tools like Metabase and Retool.

---

5. Migration Guide: How to Switch Tech Stacks at Minimal Cost

5.1. Firestore → Postgres Data Migration Script

# Using pgloader for automated conversion  
pgloader \  
  firestore://project-id.firebaseio.com/collection \  
  postgresql://user:pass@localhost:5432/db  

5.2. Code Refactoring Example (User Comment System)

• Firebase Approach:

firestore.collection("comments").where("postId", "==", postId).onSnapshot();  

• Supabase Approach:

supabase.from("comments").select("*").eq("postId", postId);  
// Enable real-time listening  
.on('INSERT', payload => console.log('New comment:', payload))  

---

6. Final Decision Tree: Lock in Your Tech Stack in 1 Minute

---

7. The Future Battle: Who Will Dominate in 2025?

• Firebase:
  • Integration with Gemini AI for predictive APIs (e.g., auto-detecting malicious comments).
  • Potential for more flexible billing models.
• Supabase:
  • Distributed Postgres to break single-machine performance bottlenecks.
  • Global edge node deployment to challenge Firebase’s real-time advantage.

Additionally, let’s compare GitHub data, as shown below:

Metric	Firebase	Supabase
GitHub Stars	32K	58K
PRs Merged in 2024	127	624
Community Plugins	89	217

👉 Conclusion: Supabase’s open-source ecosystem is 2.4x more active than Firebase’s.

---

FAQ

❓ Which is better, Supabase or Firebase?
It depends on the scenario:

• Startup MVP: Firebase for rapid launch.
• Mid-to-Large Long-Term Projects: Supabase for cost control and SQL scalability.

❓ Why does Firebase have more users?
First-mover advantage (Firebase predates Supabase by 8 years) + Google’s brand effect. However, in 2024, Supabase’s weekly downloads surpassed Firebase by 32%!