Learn how Bknd and Supabase differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these backend-as-a-service (baas) tools is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Supabase appears to have several advantages over Bknd, particularly in popularity, activity, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Supabase significantly outpaces Bknd in community adoption with 102,151 stars compared to 3,724 stars on GitHub. This 27.4x difference suggests Supabase has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Supabase has 12,353 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Supabase shows more recent development activity with its last commit 6 hours ago, while Bknd was last updated 1 month ago. This suggests Supabase is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Next.js, SvelteKit. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Supabase leverages Python, SCSS, Rust, C, Objective-C, Vue, Swift, Kotlin, Elixir, Tanstack Start, Dart.
Supabase has been in development longer, starting 7 years ago, compared to Bknd which began 1 year ago. This 5.2-year head start suggests Supabase may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the Apache-2.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS).
Supabase provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Bknd may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.