Learn how Convex and Encore 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.
Last 30 days
Last commit
9 hours agoRepository age
3 yearsSelf-hosted
YesRepository
convex-backend
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 days agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v1.58.8License
MPL-2.0Repository
encoredev/encore
Encore appears to have several advantages over Convex, particularly in growth, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both Convex and Encore show comparable community engagement with 12,774 and 12,682 stars respectively. In terms of developer contributions, Convex has 842 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Encore is growing faster, adding 273 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 130 stars for Convex (+1%). Encore is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Convex last updated 9 hours ago and Encore 5 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript, Golang, Rust. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Convex uses CSS, JSX, Python, Next.js, C, Objective-C, Vue, Ruby, Kotlin, MATLAB, SvelteKit, Remix.
Encore has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Convex which began 3 years ago. This 3.1-year head start suggests Encore may have more mature features and established processes.
Encore is licensed under MPL-2.0, while Convex's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS). However, they also have distinct specializations: Encore extends into PaaS & Deployment Tools, Development Environments.
Convex provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Encore may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.