Firebase made backends easy: auth, a realtime database, storage and hosting behind a friendly SDK. But two things push Australian teams to look elsewhere, the classic complaints (NoSQL lock-in, unpredictable scaling costs, thin querying) and the one that's specific to us: Firebase is a Google product, and Google is a US company.
That matters because of a distinction most comparison articles miss entirely. So before the list, the one rule that reorders it.
The rule that reorders every list
- A Sydney region tells you where the servers sit, not who owns them.
- Ownership is the thing that changes: an Australian company vs a foreign one.
- A US-owned provider's Australian region is still built, run and supported overseas.
- An Australian-owned provider means local ownership, local accountability, local support.
- So "hosted in the Sydney region" is not the same as "an Australian company."
Why Firebase isn't an Australian-owned option
Firebase runs exclusively on Google Cloud and cannot be self-hosted. Its core databases, Realtime Database and Cloud Firestore, offer limited region control, and even where an Australian location exists, Google LLC remains a US-owned company. Choosing a nearby region changes latency, not ownership: the company that builds, runs and supports the platform is still overseas. For a team handling health, legal, financial, education or government data that wants an Australian company behind it, that's usually a disqualifier before the feature comparison even begins.
The contenders, ranked by what Australian teams actually need
Supabase, the open-source favourite
Supabase is the most popular Firebase alternative and, for most teams, the better product: it's built on PostgreSQL (portable, powerful, no NoSQL lock-in), it's open-source, and it can be fully self-hosted with Docker. The catch for us is that Supabase Inc. is US-owned (Delaware), so its hosted cloud is run by a foreign company even in the Sydney region. Self-hosting Supabase on Australian infrastructure keeps it in Australian hands, at the cost of running it yourself. We go deep on this in WattleDB vs Supabase.
Appwrite, self-host everything
Appwrite is an open-source backend server packaged as Docker microservices exposing REST, WebSocket and GraphQL. Its pitch is control: deploy it anywhere, own everything, no platform fee, you pay only for your own infrastructure. Self-hosted on Australian-owned servers, it keeps your data in Australia and under your control. The trade-off, as with any self-host, is that the DevOps is yours: scaling, patching, backups, on-call.
PocketBase, the single-binary minimalist
PocketBase bundles a SQLite database, auth, file storage and an admin UI into one Go binary. It's a delight for small projects and prototypes, and being self-hosted, your data is as Australian as the box you run it on. The limits are inherent: SQLite and a single binary suit small-to-mid workloads, not high-concurrency multi-tenant SaaS.
Nhost & Hasura, GraphQL-first
Nhost bundles Postgres, Hasura GraphQL, auth and storage; Hasura on its own gives you instant GraphQL over Postgres. Both are open-source and self-hostable on Australian infrastructure. If your team is GraphQL-native they're excellent, you're still, however, assembling and operating the stack yourself to keep it in Australian hands.
WattleDB, Australian-owned by construction
The options above make you choose: convenience (a foreign-owned managed cloud) or Australian control (self-host it yourself). WattleDB removes that trade-off. It's a 100% Australian-owned Backend-as-a-Service, managed PostgreSQL, auto-generated REST APIs, row-level security and S3-compatible object storage today, with hosted authentication and transactional email coming soon, built, run and hosted in Australia across Sydney and Melbourne. Because RR Sols Pty Ltd has no foreign parent, WattleDB is Australian from the database up: owned here, hosted here, supported here, with an Australian team you can actually reach. You get the managed convenience and the Australian ownership, without running servers.
Side by side: the ownership axis
| Platform | Core DB | Self-host? | Company ownership | Managed & Australian-owned? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firebase | Firestore (NoSQL) | No | US (Google) | No |
| Supabase | PostgreSQL | Yes | US (Delaware) | Hosted cloud: no |
| Appwrite | MariaDB | Yes | US-owned | Self-host only |
| PocketBase | SQLite | Yes | Open-source (self-run) | Self-host only |
| Nhost / Hasura | PostgreSQL | Yes | US-owned | Self-host only |
| WattleDB | PostgreSQL | Managed | Australian Pty Ltd | Yes, by construction |
Corporate details reflect publicly available information at time of writing and can change, always verify a provider's current ownership before relying on it for an ownership claim.
How to choose
- No Australian-ownership requirement? Any of these can work; pick on features and pricing. Supabase is the safe, portable default.
- Want Australian control and happy to run infrastructure? Self-host Supabase or Appwrite on Australian-owned servers.
- Want an Australian-owned platform, fully managed? Use a wholly Australian-owned BaaS, WattleDB, so you get onshore control without the DevOps.
- Leaving Firebase specifically? Moving to Postgres (Supabase or WattleDB) also frees you from NoSQL lock-in and metered-scaling surprises.
If Australian ownership is a real requirement, the honest shortlist is: self-host an open-source option, or use a provider that is Australian-owned end to end. Everything else is a local region with an overseas owner.
New to building the backend at all? Start with How to build a SaaS in Australia, then the deep dive on data sovereignty.