Cloudant vs Neon

What Cloudant is

IBM Cloudant is a proprietary managed JSON document database built on Apache CouchDB, with a compatible HTTPS API and replication protocol. The Lite plan is free for evaluation and fixes capacity at 20 reads, 10 writes and five global queries per second with 1 GB storage. Standard begins at one provisioned capacity block—100 reads, 50 writes and five global queries per second—includes 20 GB and bills capacity plus excess storage hourly. Dedicated Hardware adds workload isolation, private networking and selected compliance and key-management options. A Cloudant service is not the same as self-hosting CouchDB.

What Neon is

Neon is serverless Postgres that separates storage from compute, which lets it scale to zero when idle and create instant database branches for previews and tests. Branching is the feature that changes workflows: a pull request can get its own copy of production-shaped data without a restore. The trade-off is cold starts on an idle branch and a hosted-only model, so it is not the choice when the database must stay on your own hardware.

What Cloudant is built to do

JSON document database

Stores schema-flexible documents, attachments and secondary indexes behind HTTPS APIs.

CouchDB-compatible replication

Supports replication patterns between Cloudant regions and compatible CouchDB systems.

Provisioned throughput

Scales read, write and global-query capacity in linked blocks through the dashboard or API.

IBM IAM and SDKs

Integrates IBM Cloud access controls and provides supported Java, Node.js, Python, Swift, Go and mobile clients.

What Neon is built to do

Storage-compute separation

Scales compute independently of stored data and suspends it when idle.

Database branching

Creates an instant copy-on-write branch for previews and tests.

Postgres compatibility

Speaks the Postgres wire protocol so existing drivers and tools work.

Choose Cloudant if

• Offline or distributed applications that benefit from CouchDB-style replication
• JSON workloads dominated by key lookups and well-designed partitioned queries
• Teams able to test request-class capacity, 429 handling and multi-region conflicts

Skip Cloudant if

• The application depends on relational joins, broad ad-hoc SQL or multi-document ACID transactions
• Traffic is too unpredictable to provision and monitor request-class capacity
• A free Lite instance is being treated as a production SLA or scalable datastore

Choose Neon if

• Side projects and prototypes: the Free plan gives 100 compute-unit hours, 0.5 GB and 10 branches per project
• Teams that want Postgres billed by usage with no monthly minimum — Launch is $0.106 per CU-hour and $0.35 per GB-month
• Apps that need database branching for previews and CI

Skip Neon if

• Your database is always on: 100 CU-hours a month is roughly 4 days of a 1-CU compute, so Free will not cover 24/7
• You need HIPAA, SOC 2 reports, private networking or IP allow rules — those are on Scale at $0.222 per CU-hour
• You prefer a flat monthly price; Neon bills compute and storage separately

Cloudant: pros & cons

• Managed document service: IBM handles database servers, upgrades, patching and core high-availability infrastructure.
• CouchDB lineage: Compatible HTTP APIs and replication ease selected CouchDB application and migration patterns.
• Explicit capacity model: Read, write and global-query throughput are provisioned in documented blocks.
• Multi-region option: Application-managed replication can support active-active regional architectures.
• Lite is evaluation capacity: It cannot scale and blocks new writes above its storage limit.
• Capacity dimensions scale together: A workload dominated by one request class may pay for unused allowances in the others.
• Exceeding throughput returns 429: Applications need retry, backoff and load testing rather than assuming automatic unlimited scale.
• Cross-region is not automatic application resilience: Conflict behavior, traffic routing, monitoring and recovery remain design responsibilities.

Neon: pros & cons

• Real Postgres, not a lookalike
• Branching for preview environments
• Scales to zero, so idle projects cost little
• Cold starts on idle databases
• Newer platform than the incumbents
• Advanced tuning is limited compared with self-managed Postgres