A full-stack app has to run four things — a frontend, a backend, a database, and usually auth plus background jobs. "Best hosting" isn't one product; it's one architecture decision: do you run everything in one place, split the frontend from a serverless backend, or hand auth, database, and storage to a backend-as-a-service? Answer that and the shortlist writes itself.
The decision that matters: three architectures
- Monolith on a PaaS — the app server, a managed database, workers, and cron all live in one project on a platform like Railway, Render, or Fly. One place to deploy, one place to reason about.
- Split — an edge/serverless frontend (Vercel, Netlify) sits in front of serverless functions and a serverless database (Neon, Supabase, PlanetScale). Each layer scales on its own.
- BaaS — a backend-as-a-service (Supabase, Firebase) provides auth, database, and storage out of the box, so you write mostly frontend and call its SDK.
Your answer maps straight to the table below.
The options, sorted by fit
| Approach | What runs where | Best for | Free tier | Main watch-out |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monolith PaaS (Railway/Render/Fly) | App server, managed DB, workers, and cron in one project | A team that wants one place to run everything with a real DB and jobs | Trial credit / spin-down free tier exists | Priced closer to a running instance; you scale it yourself |
| Split (Vercel/Netlify + serverless DB) | Edge/serverless frontend + serverless functions + a serverless database (Neon, Supabase, PlanetScale) | A heavy frontend with a light, serverless-friendly backend | Free tier exists on each piece | No always-on process — long jobs, websockets, and in-memory state don't fit |
| BaaS (Supabase/Firebase) | A backend-as-a-service handles auth, database, and storage; you write mostly frontend | Moving fastest with auth+DB+storage out-of-the-box | Free tier exists | Less control; potential lock-in on proprietary features |
| Self-host (VPS/Docker) | Everything in containers behind a reverse proxy on your own machine | Cheapest at scale; full OS access | N/A | You own uptime, TLS, scaling, backups, and monitoring |
| AWS/GCP (managed cloud) | Managed compute, database, queues, and storage as separate services | Real scale, or a team that already knows the cloud | Free tier exists (usage-limited) | Most moving parts and the steepest ops/billing learning curve |
Three recommendations
Run everything in one place: a monolith on a PaaS
Reach for Railway or Render when you want one project that runs the app server, a real managed database, background workers, and cron together. Nothing is stitched across vendors: you deploy once and reason about one system. Pick Fly.io instead when the app needs to run in multiple regions close to users. This is the safest default for a team that just wants everything to work with a genuine database and jobs.
Split when the frontend is the heavy part
When the frontend does most of the work and the backend is light and serverless-friendly, put the frontend on Vercel or Netlify, run the backend as serverless functions, and reach for a serverless database like Neon, Supabase, or PlanetScale. Each layer scales to zero and to spikes on its own — ideal when there's no long-lived connection or in-memory state.
BaaS when you want to move fastest
When speed matters most and your app is mostly CRUD, auth, and file storage, a BaaS like Supabase or Firebase gives you auth, database, and storage on day one, so you write mostly frontend. The tradeoff is real: less control over the backend, and potential lock-in if you lean on the vendor's proprietary features.
The trap to avoid
Two traps sit at the edges. The first is over-adopting a BaaS's proprietary features — its specific auth flows, functions, or realtime APIs — until leaving means a rewrite, not a migration. Use the parts that map to open standards (a plain SQL database is portable; a vendor-only feature is not) so you keep an exit. The second is splitting into serverless when you actually have long-running jobs or websockets: functions time out and can't hold a connection. That runtime fork is the same one covered in Best Hosting for Node.js — decide it before you pick a platform.
How to choose in 60 seconds
- Want one place to run a real backend, DB, and jobs? Monolith on a PaaS: Railway or Render; Fly for multi-region.
- Frontend is the heavy part and the backend is light/stateless? Split: Vercel or Netlify in front of serverless functions and a serverless DB (Neon, Supabase, PlanetScale).
- Need to move fastest, mostly CRUD plus auth and storage? BaaS: Supabase or Firebase — accept less control and some lock-in.
- Unsure? Start on a monolith PaaS free/trial tier — it runs everything, and you can split pieces out later once you know the shape of the app.
A note on pricing
Prices and free-tier limits change often — verify current numbers on each provider's pricing page. The stable signal is the model's shape: serverless and BaaS bill by usage — invocations, requests, rows, storage — which is great at low or spiky traffic but climbs under sustained volume, while a monolith PaaS or a VPS bills by the instance whether or not it's busy (cheaper under steady load). That shape predicts your bill better than any headline number.
FAQ
Should I use a BaaS like Supabase or run my own backend?
A BaaS wins when your app is mostly CRUD plus auth and file storage — Supabase or Firebase gives you all three on day one, so you write almost only frontend. Run your own backend when you need custom server logic, long-running jobs, or you want to avoid leaning on a vendor's proprietary features. Many teams start on a BaaS and add a small backend service later for the parts that don't fit.
Can I mix approaches?
Yes, and it's common. A Vercel or Netlify frontend paired with a Supabase BaaS for auth, database, and storage is a solid, popular combo — the frontend host does what it's best at while the BaaS handles state. You can also run a monolith PaaS for the backend and put the marketing frontend on an edge host. Mixing is fine as long as each piece owns a clear job.
Do I need Kubernetes or AWS for a full-stack app?
For most apps, no. A monolith PaaS or a BaaS runs a real full-stack app with a database, auth, and background jobs without you touching Kubernetes or raw cloud services. Reach for AWS/GCP or Kubernetes when you hit genuine scale or need infrastructure a PaaS can't express — not before, because the ops cost is real.
Building the app these run, not just choosing where to put it? The MVP Machine turns a spec into a shipped product.