Managed relational databases · November 2026 Edition
Amazon Aurora vs Supabase
One of fourteen models named Amazon Aurora first on the direct prompt; zero named Supabase. Amazon Aurora was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Supabase by twelve and Amazon Aurora carries 50 labels and Supabase 24, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share8%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate20%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#5A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels5024A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Amazon Aurora reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Google Cloud SQL was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Amazon RDS vs Amazon Aurora · Amazon RDS vs Supabase · Azure SQL Database vs Amazon Aurora
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the managed relational databases page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Amazon AuroraFirst choices, of fourteen modelsSupabase
Direct102 against Amazon Aurora
Paraphrase301 against Amazon Aurora · 2 against Supabase
Comparative40
Budget-constrained041 against Amazon Aurora
Scale-constrained001 against Amazon Aurora
Negative005 against Amazon Aurora · 1 against Supabase
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Amazon Aurora and Supabase were named in the same answer forty-two times, of the 139 answers naming Amazon Aurora and the 95 naming Supabase. In those answers Supabase took the first choice ten times and Amazon Aurora three.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Amazon Aurora and Supabase stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | ||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | | ||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
Amazon Aurora Supabase first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Amazon Aurora on the left and Supabase on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Amazon Aurora and Supabase stood in it.
Amazon Aurora first, Supabase an alternative
1 of 14 modelsSupabase was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Gemini 3.5 FlashAmazon Aurora alternatives: AlloyDB for PostgreSQL, Azure SQL Database, CockroachDB Cloud, Google Cloud SQL, Neon, Supabase
Neither was the first choice, one was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database
Perplexity SonarAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, CockroachDB, Google Cloud SQL, Supabase
Mistral SmallAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Google Cloud SQL
DeepSeek V4 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Llama 4 MaverickAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Google Cloud SQL
MiniMax M2.5Amazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
GPT-6 LunaAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Muse Glimmer 30BAmazon RDS alternatives: Amazon Aurora, Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Amazon RDS, Google Cloud SQL alternatives: Azure SQL Database
Grok 4.20Google Cloud SQL alternatives: Amazon RDS, Azure SQL Database
Qwen 3.7 FlashAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Kimi K2Amazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
GLM 4.7 FlashXAmazon RDS alternatives: Azure SQL Database, Google Cloud SQL
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Supabase leads by twenty-four points.
Supabase29%#1 of 8Amazon Aurora5%#6 of 8Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Amazon Aurora8%#4 of 11Supabase8%#5 of 11Enterprise
The order flips: Amazon Aurora leads at enterprise.
Amazon Aurora43%#1 of 8Supabase0%#– of 8What the models said about Amazon Aurora
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Some models explicitly recommend avoiding RDS for production core systems unless absolutely necessary.” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“Experts advise caution or avoidance for production core systems unless absolutely necessary.” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Overkill: Skip premium options like Amazon Aurora or Azure SQL Managed Instance” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“If your infrastructure is already on AWS, choose Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL. It balances reliability, compliance, auto-scaling, and industry-standard adoption.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Best Overall for AWS Infrastructure: Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL ... is the gold standard for mid-sized B2B platforms.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Choose Amazon Aurora if you're on AWS or need maximum scalability — it provides the best price/performance ratio” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Supabase
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“can be attractive depending on your architecture, but I'd be more cautious for core production systems” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“These are rising for mid-sized B2B but less "enterprise battle-tested" than the big three.” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Supabase, for example, pauses free projects after inactivity” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Go with Supabase or Neon if you are building a new web app, want a free tier that lasts months” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Supabase (PostgreSQL) and Google Cloud SQL (PostgreSQL or MySQL) are your best bets” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“If you're just starting out: Use Neon (free tier) or Supabase (free tier).” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Amazon RDS vs Amazon AuroraAmazon RDS vs SupabaseAzure SQL Database vs Amazon AuroraAzure SQL Database vs SupabaseGoogle Cloud SQL vs Amazon AuroraGoogle Cloud SQL vs SupabaseAmazon Aurora vs DigitalOcean Managed DatabasesAmazon Aurora vs NeonSupabase vs DigitalOcean Managed DatabasesSupabase vs NeonAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full managed databases standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.