Backenly vs. Firebase
Firebase is Google's app development platform: Firestore and the Realtime Database, authentication, hosting, Cloud Functions, and a mature first-party mobile SDK ecosystem. It is particularly strong for mobile-first products.
The difference in one paragraph
The real choice here is the data model, and it is the one decision that gets more expensive to revisit than any other. Firestore stores documents, which is flexible while your data is simple and becomes work once it is relational, because the native query API has no cross-collection joins and the documented pattern is to denormalise and keep the copies in sync yourself. Backenly is PostgreSQL, where relations are the model and a query across three tables is ordinary. Around that, the two products differ in what they do after launch: Firebase and Google Cloud give you a strong observability stack that tells you what is happening, and Backenly adds a repair loop that acts on a narrow class of findings and queues the rest for a person. If your product is mobile-first with simple data, Firebase is very hard to beat. If your data has relationships, start relational.
How they are shaped
Documents versus relations, and why it compounds
Choosing Firestore is choosing a document model, and that choice propagates through everything you build on it. Document stores are excellent while access patterns are simple and become demanding when they are not: without cross-collection joins in the native query API, the documented approach is denormalisation, which means copying data into several documents and owning the consistency of those copies in application code. The failure mode is not that something breaks; it is that in month four a query the product now needs cannot be expressed without restructuring collections and backfilling. PostgreSQL expresses that query directly, because relations are the model rather than something layered on top. If your product has users who own things that reference other things, you have relational data whichever database you keep it in.
Two honest ways to be surprised by a bill
Firestore is billed per operation, with a free daily allowance and metered usage above it, so the bill is a function of how your data is modelled and how chatty your listeners are. That is a fair model and it scales down to nothing for small projects. Backenly bills a flat monthly plan with visible quotas. Neither is dishonest and they fail differently: usage pricing surprises you with a bill, and a flat plan surprises you with a quota. For a small team, the quota is usually the more survivable surprise, and for a large one with efficient access patterns the metered model can easily be cheaper.
What each platform does when something is wrong
Firebase and Google Cloud provide a mature observability stack: metrics, logging, error reporting, and alerting that will tell you a rule is rejecting traffic or a query is slow. It reports, and you act. Backenly reports too, and additionally acts on a narrow set of findings where the repair is additive and reversible: a missing index, a bloated table, a REST surface that stopped being served. Everything else, including anything touching authentication or anything destructive, is queued for a person. The difference is not that one platform watches and the other does not. It is that one of them will also apply a small, enumerable set of fixes without being asked.
Capability by capability
The fourth column says what each difference costs or buys in practice, including when the honest answer is nothing.
| Aspect | Firebase | Backenly | In practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data model | Document collections (Firestore, Realtime Database) | Relational PostgreSQL | The decision that is hardest to reverse later. Pick it against your access patterns, not your first screen. |
| Cross-entity queries | No joins in the native query API; denormalisation is the documented pattern. Firestore Enterprise edition documents pipeline operations that join with subqueries | Ordinary SQL joins, and embedded resources over REST in one round trip | On Firestore a relational query is a data-modelling exercise. On Postgres it is a query. |
| Mobile clients | Mature first-party SDKs for Android and Apple platforms, with offline persistence on by default | A JavaScript SDK and a standard REST API | Firebase is clearly stronger here. If you are building a native mobile app, this row may outweigh the rest of the table. |
| Offline behaviour | Local persistence and offline reads and writes, enabled by default on Android and Apple platforms | No offline persistence layer; the client talks to the API | For an app expected to work on a train, Firebase solves a problem Backenly does not attempt. |
| Access control | Security Rules, a dedicated rules language with its own testing tooling | PostgreSQL grants and row-level security, with policy SQL installed verbatim and read back | Both are capable and both can be got wrong. The difference is the language you express the rule in and where it is enforced. |
| Realtime | Realtime Database and Firestore listeners, a core strength | Change events over Server-Sent Events, built on Postgres LISTEN/NOTIFY | Both deliver live updates. Firebase pairs its listeners with documented offline persistence; Backenly has no offline layer. |
| Observability and repair | Firebase console plus Google Cloud monitoring, logging, and alerting | The same reporting posture, plus a narrow set of repairs applied automatically and the rest queued for approval | Not monitoring versus no monitoring. Reporting versus reporting plus a small, bounded set of automatic fixes. |
| Adjacent tooling | Crashlytics, Analytics, App Distribution, Remote Config, Cloud Messaging | None of these | Firebase is a product suite. Backenly is a backend. If you want the suite, that is a real advantage. |
| Portability | Firestore export tooling; the data model is proprietary | Ordinary PostgreSQL and pg_dump; Apache-2.0 and self-hostable | Leaving Postgres is a dump and a restore. Leaving a document model usually means remodelling the data. |
| Billing shape | Free Spark tier, then pay-as-you-go on Blaze, billed per operation | Flat monthly plans with visible quotas | Metered cost tracks usage and can be cheaper or much more expensive. A flat plan trades that for predictability. |
- Data model
Firebase
Document collections (Firestore, Realtime Database)
Backenly
Relational PostgreSQL
In practice
The decision that is hardest to reverse later. Pick it against your access patterns, not your first screen.
- Cross-entity queries
Firebase
No joins in the native query API; denormalisation is the documented pattern. Firestore Enterprise edition documents pipeline operations that join with subqueries
Backenly
Ordinary SQL joins, and embedded resources over REST in one round trip
In practice
On Firestore a relational query is a data-modelling exercise. On Postgres it is a query.
- Mobile clients
Firebase
Mature first-party SDKs for Android and Apple platforms, with offline persistence on by default
Backenly
A JavaScript SDK and a standard REST API
In practice
Firebase is clearly stronger here. If you are building a native mobile app, this row may outweigh the rest of the table.
- Offline behaviour
Firebase
Local persistence and offline reads and writes, enabled by default on Android and Apple platforms
Backenly
No offline persistence layer; the client talks to the API
In practice
For an app expected to work on a train, Firebase solves a problem Backenly does not attempt.
- Access control
Firebase
Security Rules, a dedicated rules language with its own testing tooling
Backenly
PostgreSQL grants and row-level security, with policy SQL installed verbatim and read back
In practice
Both are capable and both can be got wrong. The difference is the language you express the rule in and where it is enforced.
- Realtime
Firebase
Realtime Database and Firestore listeners, a core strength
Backenly
Change events over Server-Sent Events, built on Postgres LISTEN/NOTIFY
In practice
Both deliver live updates. Firebase pairs its listeners with documented offline persistence; Backenly has no offline layer.
- Observability and repair
Firebase
Firebase console plus Google Cloud monitoring, logging, and alerting
Backenly
The same reporting posture, plus a narrow set of repairs applied automatically and the rest queued for approval
In practice
Not monitoring versus no monitoring. Reporting versus reporting plus a small, bounded set of automatic fixes.
- Adjacent tooling
Firebase
Crashlytics, Analytics, App Distribution, Remote Config, Cloud Messaging
Backenly
None of these
In practice
Firebase is a product suite. Backenly is a backend. If you want the suite, that is a real advantage.
- Portability
Firebase
Firestore export tooling; the data model is proprietary
Backenly
Ordinary PostgreSQL and pg_dump; Apache-2.0 and self-hostable
In practice
Leaving Postgres is a dump and a restore. Leaving a document model usually means remodelling the data.
- Billing shape
Firebase
Free Spark tier, then pay-as-you-go on Blaze, billed per operation
Backenly
Flat monthly plans with visible quotas
In practice
Metered cost tracks usage and can be cheaper or much more expensive. A flat plan trades that for predictability.
These are real advantages, not concessions written to look balanced. If one of them is decisive for you, it should decide it.
Where Firebase is stronger
A mature mobile SDK ecosystem with strong offline support
First-party Android and Apple SDKs, with offline persistence enabled by default on both, documented by Firebase itself. If you are shipping a native mobile app, this is a genuine advantage and Backenly does not compete with it.
Offline-first behaviour that actually works
Firestore caches locally and serves reads and writes while the device is offline, syncing when it reconnects. Building that on top of a REST API is a project in its own right.
A product suite, not just a backend
Crashlytics, Analytics, Cloud Messaging, Remote Config, and App Distribution sit alongside the database. If you want those integrated rather than assembled, Firebase gives you a coherent set on day one.
Google Cloud underneath
Scale, regional coverage, IAM, and an observability stack that a small team could not build. If your organisation is already on Google Cloud, the integration and the procurement path are both easier.
A free tier that scales down to genuinely nothing
The Spark plan needs no payment method, and Blaze keeps the free allowances. For a prototype with light traffic, the bill can stay at zero for a long time.
Where Backenly is stronger
Relational data expressed as relational data
Joins, foreign keys, constraints, and transactions are the model rather than something you emulate. For products whose entities reference each other, this removes an entire class of consistency code from the application.
Authorisation enforced in the database
Access control is PostgreSQL grants and row-level security, applied where the data lives rather than in a separate rules layer, and the policy SQL is read back from the catalogue after it is installed.
Invariants that catch silent policy failures
A policy that is enabled but evaluates to USING (true), or one written against a session variable the data plane never sets, produces a healthy-looking 200 with no rows. These are the failures a dashboard cannot show you, and they have dedicated checks.
An exit that is a database dump
Standard PostgreSQL and REST, Apache-2.0 licensed and self-hostable. Moving off is a dump and a restore rather than a remodelling exercise.
Reporting, and the narrow band beyond it
Both platforms will tell you something is wrong. Firebase and Google Cloud do it with metrics, logs, error reporting, and alerts, and the response is yours. Backenly reports the same way and additionally repairs a small, enumerable set of findings without being asked: a missing index on a relationship column, a table carrying more dead rows than live ones, an index that is mostly empty space, a REST surface that stopped being served, a row-security policy where row ownership is derivable from the schema. Schema-touching repairs take a restore point first and re-probe afterwards. Anything touching authentication, external credentials, or anything destructive or irreversible always waits for a person, and cannot be made automatic by choosing a more permissive setting. Most of the catalogue is reported rather than repaired, which is the honest shape of the feature.
Moving from Firestore
There is no automated path, and it would be misleading to imply one. Moving from a document store to a relational schema means deciding what your entities and relationships actually are, which is design work that only your team can do. What Backenly provides on the other side is ordinary PostgreSQL and a REST API, so the destination is a standard one and the second migration, if you ever need it, is a pg_dump.
What stays your work
- No import tool and no migration service exists, on any plan.
- Remodelling documents into tables is design work you own.
- Security Rules do not translate into row-level security. The rules are re-authored.
- Backenly has no offline persistence layer, so an offline-first client needs rethinking.
- Firebase-specific services such as Crashlytics, Analytics, and Cloud Messaging have no Backenly equivalent and would stay where they are or be replaced.
Which one to pick
Choose Firebase when
- You are building a native mobile app and want first-party SDKs with offline persistence that already works.
- Your app must function offline and sync later. Firebase solves this; Backenly does not attempt it.
- You want Crashlytics, Analytics, Cloud Messaging, and Remote Config integrated rather than assembled.
- Your data is genuinely document-shaped, with few relationships and simple access patterns.
- Your organisation is already on Google Cloud and the integration and procurement path matter.
Choose Backenly when
- Your entities reference each other and you want joins, foreign keys, and transactions rather than denormalised copies.
- You want authorisation enforced by the database rather than in a separate rules language.
- Predictable monthly cost matters more than paying per operation.
- You want the option to take the whole thing elsewhere as an ordinary Postgres dump.
Common questions
Firestore's native query API has no cross-collection joins, and the documented pattern for relational access is to denormalise. Firestore's Enterprise edition documents pipeline operations that perform joins using subqueries, so the flat statement that Firestore cannot join is out of date. The practical point stands for the standard query API: relational access is a data-modelling exercise there and a query in Postgres.
Backenly delivers database change events over Server-Sent Events, built on PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY through a shared listener hub. You can subscribe to changes and receive updates live. It does not replicate offline persistence or the local cache, which is a substantial part of what makes Firebase realtime feel the way it does on mobile.
No. Security Rules are a capable access-control system with their own testing tooling, and a correctly written rule set is secure. The difference is where the rule is enforced and what language it is written in: Firebase evaluates rules at its API layer, Backenly enforces grants and row-level security inside PostgreSQL. Both can be got wrong by the person writing them.
It depends on your traffic and your data model, and any answer that does not say so is guessing. Firestore bills per operation with a free daily allowance, so a low-traffic app can cost nothing and a chatty one can cost a lot. Backenly charges a flat monthly plan, so the cost is fixed and you meet a quota instead.
Where the Firebase facts on this page came from
- Firebase offers a no-cost Spark plan requiring no payment method and a pay-as-you-go Blaze plan that retains the Spark free allowances. Firestore is billed per operation, with free daily allowances for reads, writes, and deletes. https://firebase.google.com/pricing (read 2026-09-02)
- Cloud Firestore documents no cross-collection joins in its native query API. Enterprise edition documents pipeline operations that perform joins with subqueries. https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/query-data/queries (read 2026-09-02)
- Cloud Firestore offline persistence is supported on Android, Apple platforms, and web, and is enabled by default on Android and Apple platforms. On web it is off by default and must be enabled explicitly. https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/manage-data/enable-offline (read 2026-09-02)