Skapi vs Firebase vs Supabase: Choosing the Best Backend for Performance and Scalability – ██FR█████ █INTELL███████████

This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Skapi

Choosing the right backend service is crucial for the performance, scalability, and user experience of your application. From query response times to concurrent user handling and file upload speeds, your backend directly impacts how smooth, fast, and reliable your app feels.

Pick the wrong backend, and you risk getting locked into infrastructure that slows down your app, limits scalability, and frustrates users with lag and downtime. Pick the right one, and you’re set up for growth and speed from day one.

While Firebase and Supabase are popular backend-as-a-service (BaaS) platforms, their added complexity can introduce performance overhead. Skapi takes a different approach: offering speed and scalability out of the box.

In this article, we’ll compare Firebase, Supabase, and Skapi across three key backend performance metrics:

Query Response Times (basic and complex)
Concurrent User Handling (scalability under load)
File Upload Speeds (media-heavy app performance)

1. Query Response Times

Basic Queries:

Basic query response time is the foundation of backend performance. If it lags, your whole app feels broken, from dashboards to search results to profile loads.

Here’s the query we will be requesting to the backend:

Skapi:

skapi.getRecords({ table: { name: 'performance_test', access_group: 'public' } }, {limit: fetch_limit});

Supabase:

supabase.from('performance_test').select('*').limit(fetch_limit);

Firebase:

query(
  collection(db, "performance_test"),
  limit(fetch_limit)
);

We will do simple data fetching query testing with various ranges of fetch limits.

In benchmark tests, Skapi consistently outperforms Firebase and Supabase in basic query speed, making apps feel instantly responsive without extra optimization.

Complex Queries:

Complex queries such as joins, sorts, or aggregations, push systems harder. Firebase and Supabase tend to slow down as complexity grows, while Skapi maintains low latency even under demanding query loads.

Each service uses a different underlying database model:

Skapi: NoSQL with auto-indexing and client-defined access control
Firebase: NoSQL document store (Firestore) with structured indexes
Supabase: SQL/Postgres with schema-driven indexes

To compare, here are equivalent examples of range queries:

Skapi:

skapi.getRecords({
  table: { name: 'performance_test', access_group: 'public' },
  index: { name: 'test_index', value: 20, range: 60 }
})

Supabase:

supabase
  .from('performance_test')
  .select('*')
  .gte('data->test_index_value', 20)
  .lte('data->test_index_value', 80)

Firebase:

query(
  collection(db, "performance_test"),
  where("test_index_value", ">=", 20),
  where("test_index_value", "<=", 80)
)

Notes on Indexing and Joins
Index condition queries rely on conditional lookups using comparison operators (>, <, >=, <=) on indexed fields.

For more complex operations such as joins, sorts, or aggregations, the approach differs by platform:

Skapi: Supports indexed conditional lookups directly, but for multi-table relationships or advanced aggregations, data is typically fetched in ranges and then joined or aggregated on the client.
Firebase (Firestore): Works similarly – queries can filter indexed fields efficiently, but there is no native join support. Developers usually fetch multiple datasets and merge them client-side. Composite indexes must be explicitly created for more complex queries.
Supabase (Postgres): Can handle joins, sorts, and aggregations directly in SQL, but these operations are heavier on the backend. While powerful, they often introduce more latency compared to client-side merges, especially under load.

Result: Skapi ensures your app’s navigation, filtering, and data-heavy features remain fast and smooth, no matter the complexity.

2. Concurrent User Handling

Scalability isn’t just about spinning up more servers, it’s about maintaining performance under heavy load. Some backends choke as traffic scales.

In stress tests, Skapi’s backend architecture holds steady, delivering fast, consistent response times even with thousands of concurrent users. This makes it ideal for apps expecting growth, viral traffic spikes, or global audiences.

Examples of concurrent test:

// Sends multiple requests simultaneously
const promises = [];
for (let i = 0; i < concurrentCount; i++) {
  promises.push(
    skapi.getRecords({
      table: { name: 'performance_test', access_group: 'public' }
    })
  );
}
await Promise.all(promises); // All execute at once

With Skapi, you get true horizontal scalability, meaning your app grows seamlessly without compromising speed or user experience.

Notes on Concurrency

Skapi: Designed with serverless elasticity; concurrency scaling is handled automatically by the platform.
Supabase: Concurrency depends on underlying Postgres + connection pooling; under extreme load, queries may queue or slow down.
Firebase: Firestore handles a high degree of concurrent reads and writes, but performance can degrade if many clients hit the same document paths, since hot-spotting leads to throttling.

3. File Upload Speeds

For apps handling images, video, or large files, upload performance is critical. No user wants to stare at a stuck progress bar.

Firebase and Supabase can slow down significantly on large file uploads.
Skapi maintains consistently fast uploads across small and large files.

In fact, the performance gap widens as file sizes increase, making Skapi the clear winner for media-heavy apps, SaaS platforms, and social apps.

How the Tests Were Conducted

To ensure a fair and transparent comparison, each test followed structured benchmarks:

Basic Query Test: Measured how quickly backends respond to simple database queries (profile loads, product lists, or recent posts). Average, min, and max response times were recorded, with success rates checked for 100% delivery.
Complex Query Test: Ran 16 variations across 8 categories, including index lookups, range queries, tag searches, sorting, aggregations, and multi-filters. Data sets included realistic fields like price, rating, category, and tags.
Concurrent User Test: Simulated loads from 5 to 100,000 simultaneous users, measuring how response times and success rates held up under spikes (such as flash sales, viral content, or product launches).
File Upload Test: Uploaded files from 1KB to 1GB, tracking average speeds and time-to-completion. These mirrored real-world use cases such as profile images, PDFs, audio, and full HD videos.

All tests were repeated multiple times under identical conditions to rule out anomalies. Data sets were auto-cleaned after runs to ensure fair results.

Why Skapi Wins on Performance

Across all three categories – query response time, concurrent user handling, and file uploads, Skapi outperforms Firebase and Supabase.

The key technical advantages that set Skapi apart are:

Fully serverless infrastructure: elastic scaling without servers to deploy or manage
NoSQL with unique indexing: optimized for high-speed lookups and range queries
Direct client-to-backend access: no middle-layer bottlenecks slowing things down

By choosing Skapi, you’re building on a backend that guarantees speed, scalability, and responsiveness from day one.

Final Thoughts: Skapi vs Firebase vs Supabase

If your app’s success depends on speed, scalability, and user experience, Skapi is the backend built for you. While Firebase and Supabase are solid options, their overhead can slow you down as your project scales.

Skapi delivers performance superiority across the board, ensuring your app stays fast, reliable, and scalable, whether you’re building a social media platform, SaaS product, or media-heavy mobile app.

In short: With Skapi, there are no delays, no bottlenecks, and no compromises, just the backend performance your project deserves.

This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Skapi