# Fly.io vs Heroku (2026)

By Noah — last updated & pricing verified September 14, 2026.

> **Verdict:** Choose Fly.io if you want per-second usage billing and multi-region deployment for Dockerized apps close to your users worldwide. Choose Heroku if you want git-push deployment with GitHub-integrated review apps and one-click database rollback, backed by Salesforce ownership. The deciding factor is billing model: Fly.io has no free tier but can cost as little as $2/month for a small idle app billed per second, while Heroku's cheapest Eco dyno is a flat $5/month that still sleeps after 30 minutes of inactivity.

**Choose Fly.io if:** You want to deploy the same Docker image across dozens of global regions close to your users; You want per-second billing so idle or low-traffic apps cost only a couple dollars a month; You want managed Postgres, Kubernetes, and Redis/object-storage extensions from one account; You're comfortable with usage-based pricing across compute, storage, IPs, and transfer instead of flat dyno tiers; You want Fly.io Sprites, persistent Linux computers for AI agent workloads, in the same platform

**Choose Heroku if:** You want git-push deployment (`git push heroku main`) with zero server configuration; You want GitHub-integrated review apps that spin up a disposable staging environment for every pull request; You want one-click rollback to a prior release or database backup; You want native support for Node.js, Ruby, Python, Java, PHP, Go, Scala, and .NET via buildpacks out of the box; You'd rather pay a flat, predictable dyno price than track usage across several metered resources

## At a glance

|  | Fly.io | Heroku |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Pricing | From $29/mo | From $5/mo |
| License | Paid | Paid |
| Best for | developers deploying Dockerized apps and APIs who want multi-region placement and per-second usage billing instead of a fixed monthly plan | small teams and startups who want git-push deployment and managed Postgres/Redis without hiring dedicated DevOps, and can accept dyno pricing above raw cloud VM cost |
| Ratings | Product Hunt 5/5 (27 reviews) | Capterra 4.6/5 (305 reviews) |

## Feature comparison

| Feature | Fly.io | Heroku |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Starting price | Yes (pay-as-you-go, ~$2/mo for a small always-on machine) | Yes (from $5/mo (Eco, sleeps after 30 min inactivity)) |
| Free tier | No (usage-based billing starts immediately on signup) | No (no free tier since 2022) |
| Platforms | Yes (web (CLI-driven, any Docker workload)) | Yes (web, Windows, macOS, Linux (CLI-driven)) |
| License | No (closed-source, paid) | No (closed-source, paid (owned by Salesforce)) |
| Deployment model | Yes (Docker image run as a Firecracker microVM) | Yes (git push with automatic buildpack detection) |
| Multi-region deployment | Yes (dozens of global regions, boot in about a second) | Unknown (not detailed as a core feature in the data) |
| Billing model | Yes (per-second usage across compute, storage, IPs, transfer) | Partial (flat monthly dyno tiers plus separately billed add-ons) |
| GitHub-integrated review apps | No | Yes (disposable staging environment per pull request) |
| Managed Postgres | Yes (included in the platform) | Yes (from $5/mo, billed separately from dyno cost) |
| Managed Kubernetes | Yes (Fly Kubernetes, $75/mo per cluster plus compute) | No |
| One-click rollback | Unknown (not detailed in the data) | Yes (release and database backup rollback) |
| Paid support plans | Yes (from $29/mo, Enterprise from $2,500/mo) | Unknown (not detailed in the data) |
| External rating | Yes (5/5 from 27 reviews (Product Hunt)) | Yes (4.6/5 from 305 reviews (Capterra)) |

## Fly.io vs Heroku pricing: which costs less?

Fly.io costs less for low-traffic or idle apps, since a small always-on machine runs about $2/month billed per second, while Heroku's cheapest Eco dyno is a flat $5/month and still sleeps after 30 minutes of inactivity.

Fly.io has no flat plan: every resource (compute seconds, storage volumes, dedicated IPs, data transfer) is itemized on one invoice, which rewards small or bursty workloads but makes total cost harder to predict in advance. Heroku's dyno pricing is flat and predictable per tier, but Standard ($25-$50/month) and Performance ($250-$500/month) dynos for real production traffic scale well above the cost of equivalent raw compute.

## Which is easier to deploy, Fly.io or Heroku?

Heroku is easier for a first deployment, since `git push heroku main` builds and runs the app automatically via buildpacks with zero server configuration, while Fly.io requires packaging the app as a Docker image first.

## Which has better multi-region support, Fly.io or Heroku?

Fly.io is built specifically for multi-region deployment, running Fly Machines as Firecracker microVMs that boot in about a second in dozens of global regions close to users, a capability not detailed as a core Heroku feature in the available data.

## Can Fly.io replace Heroku?

Yes, for developers comfortable packaging apps as Docker containers and managing usage-based billing, but Fly.io has no GitHub-integrated review-app workflow or the same one-click release rollback Heroku offers.

Fly.io matches Heroku on managed Postgres and adds Kubernetes and Redis/object-storage extensions plus true multi-region placement. Teams that specifically rely on Heroku's git-push simplicity, automatic buildpack detection, or per-pull-request review apps would need to rebuild that workflow around Fly.io's Docker-based deployment model.

## Strengths and weaknesses

### Fly.io

- Pro: Fly Machines boot in about a second and can run in dozens of regions worldwide for low-latency placement near users.
- Pro: Usage-based pricing means idle or low-traffic apps cost only a couple dollars a month rather than a flat plan fee.
- Pro: Managed Postgres, Fly Kubernetes, and Redis/object-storage extensions cover most of a typical app's infrastructure needs from one account.
- Pro: flyctl CLI and configuration-as-code (fly.toml) fit well into existing CI/CD pipelines.
- Con: No free tier: a credit card is required at signup and billing starts from the first resource created.
- Con: Usage-based pricing across compute, storage, IPs, and transfer makes total monthly cost harder to predict than a flat-rate host.
- Con: Managed Postgres and Kubernetes pricing sit on separate, less prominently documented pages than the core compute pricing.
- Con: Support beyond community channels requires a paid plan starting at $29/month.

### Heroku

- Pro: Git-push deployment with zero server configuration; buildpacks auto-detect the language and framework.
- Pro: GitHub-integrated review apps spin up a disposable staging environment for every pull request.
- Pro: Managed Postgres and Redis with one-click provisioning, automated backups, and fork/rollback support.
- Pro: 380+ buildpacks cover nearly any language beyond the natively supported ones.
- Con: No permanently free tier since 2022; the $5/month Eco dyno still sleeps after 30 minutes of inactivity.
- Con: Standard and Performance dyno pricing runs well above equivalent raw compute on AWS, DigitalOcean, or Render.
- Con: Add-on pricing (Postgres, Redis, Kafka) is billed separately from dyno cost, so total bills climb quickly for production apps.
- Con: Private Spaces (network isolation, HIPAA/PCI compliance) require a much higher-priced tier, pricing out smaller regulated teams.

## Which fits your use case?

| Use case | Pick | Why |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Team deploying a Dockerized app that needs to run close to users in multiple global regions | Fly.io | Fly.io runs Fly Machines as microVMs in dozens of regions worldwide; Heroku's multi-region capability isn't detailed as a core feature in the data. |
| Team wanting the simplest possible first deployment with no Docker experience | Heroku | Heroku's git-push deployment with automatic buildpack detection requires no Docker packaging; Fly.io requires a Docker image to deploy. |
| Side project or low-traffic app where cost predictability matters less than minimizing spend | Fly.io | Fly.io's per-second billing means an idle or low-traffic app can cost around $2/month, below Heroku's flat $5/month Eco dyno. |
| Team that wants a disposable staging environment automatically created for every pull request | Heroku | Heroku's GitHub-integrated review apps provide this out of the box; Fly.io has no equivalent named in the data. |
| Team needing managed Kubernetes alongside its application hosting | Fly.io | Fly.io offers Fly Kubernetes ($75/month per cluster plus compute) as part of its platform; Heroku has no managed Kubernetes offering. |

## Migration FAQ

### Should I use Fly.io or Heroku?

Use Fly.io if you want per-second billing and multi-region Docker deployment; use Heroku if you want git-push simplicity with GitHub-integrated review apps and predictable flat dyno pricing.

### Is Fly.io cheaper than Heroku?

For low-traffic apps, yes — a small Fly.io machine can run about $2/month billed per second, below Heroku's flat $5/month Eco dyno, though Fly.io has no free tier and usage can grow less predictably at scale.

### Can Fly.io replace Heroku?

Yes for developers comfortable with Docker and usage-based billing, but Fly.io has no GitHub-integrated review-app workflow, which teams relying on Heroku's per-pull-request staging environments would need to replace.

### Does Heroku have a free tier?

No — Heroku removed its free tier in 2022; the cheapest Eco dyno is $5/month and still sleeps after 30 minutes of inactivity.

### Which has multi-region deployment, Fly.io or Heroku?

Fly.io is built for multi-region deployment, running Docker-based Fly Machines in dozens of global regions close to users, a capability not detailed as a core Heroku feature.

## Neither a match?

- 4 alternatives to Fly.io: https://findalternative.to/fly-io
- 5 alternatives to Heroku: https://findalternative.to/heroku

---

Markdown mirror of https://findalternative.to/compare/fly-io-vs-heroku — findalternative.to, honestly ranked software alternatives. AI info: https://findalternative.to/ai