IBM Cloudant vs. Couchbase

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
N/A
Cloudant is an open source non-relational, distributed database service that requires zero-configuration. It's based on the Apache-backed CouchDB project and the creator of the open source BigCouch project. Cloudant's service provides integrated data management, search, and analytics engine designed for web applications. Cloudant scales your database on the CouchDB framework and provides hosting, administrative tools, analytics and commercial support for CouchDB and BigCouch. Cloudant is often…
$1
per month per GB of storage above the included 20 GB
Couchbase
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Couchbase is a distributed NoSQL database platform that combines a JSON document store with a high-performance In-Memory architecture. The solution is designed to support high-throughput applications by integrating multiple data services—including Key-Value, Full-Text Search (FTS), Vector Search, and Real-Time Analytics—within a single unified platform.N/A
Pricing
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Editions & Modules
Standard
$1
per month per GB of storage above the included 20 GB
Standard
$75
per month 100 reads/second ; 50 writes/second ; 5 global queries/second
Lite
Free
20 reads/second ; 10 writes/second ; 5 global queries / second ; 1 GB of storage capacity
Standard
Included
per month 20 GB of storage
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Considered Both Products
IBM Cloudant
Chose IBM Cloudant
IBM cloudant documentation is very easy to understand and because of that the implementation is also very easy. We found some difficulties in case of aws documents implementation. Performance of the cloudant database is also high as compare to the other databases. Indexing and …
Chose IBM Cloudant
I like [the] ease of use of Cloudant. Redis and Fauna have time to live features so for caching and temp data that is what I use along with messaging queues.
Chose IBM Cloudant
MongoDB Atlas and Azure Cosmos DB are the closest competitors we found with Cloudant, especially in terms of fixed pricing and having a GUI for easy viewing and quick edits of data. Cloudant's pricing model flat out beats MongoDB Atlas' in terms of how easy it would be to …
Chose IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant is great for quick deployment and configs of a database service, especially when it comes to rapid prototyping. In a research capacity, we need to spin up web services and run experiments quickly. IBM Cloudant is a fuss-free database service [that] aids in this …
Chose IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant wins in all aspects, from cost, ease of deployment, features, global availability and much more.
Chose IBM Cloudant
The gap that we wanted to cover was to deploy a self-managed CouchDB environment, which would allow us the bidirectional replication of Databases through several physical locations of the same client. IBM Cloudant was the best choice after evaluating some other platforms with …
Chose IBM Cloudant
MS SQl is more specific to relational data. Overall, it is more mature with a more feature-filled interface, user access management, and tools to manage data.
Chose IBM Cloudant
None, since we are a dedicated IBM Gold Business Partner as well as a respected IBM development and design partner, we stick with IBM products.
Chose IBM Cloudant
The feature-set, including security, is very comparable. Overall, IBM's services added to the product are mature and stable, although product support and engineers could be a little better. Global availability is improving, and Disaster Recover Capabilities are great. Overall, …
Chose IBM Cloudant
In our case, it was a no-brainer since we were using IBM Cloud. In comparison to DB2 the ease of use and JSON support was the key.
Chose IBM Cloudant
As its documentation and help are always available, it's easier to manage than any other database mentioned.
Chose IBM Cloudant
As I mentioned Redis was the first option for this implementation, IBM Cloudant excels the data center sync.
Chose IBM Cloudant
I have mainly used Cloudant as I work with IBM Cloud in my role and therefore it was easiest (and cheapest) to set up for the small scale prototypes we are building. (Which do however sometimes lead to scaled implementation)
Chose IBM Cloudant
In our case it was a no-brainer since we were using IBM Cloud. In comparison to DB2 the ease of use and JSON support was the key.
Chose IBM Cloudant
Infinitely better in every part. Except handling SQL
Chose IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant DB is backed by CouchDB and that too hosted on IBM Cloud is the key. Concurrency and durability is the key here. In-memory capabilities are non-existent on the IBM Cloudant DB.
Chose IBM Cloudant
We chose Cloudant because it was fully managed and used in the marketplace, unlike MongoDB was at the time, and it supported JSON which SQL Server 2016 didn't.
Chose IBM Cloudant
It's easier to use than Dynamo, more open than Firebase, and has better documentation that CouchDB... it might not be fair to compare Modulus, Modulus obviously suffers from some scalability issues and might not be in the same class... but its a hosted DB service we had some …
Chose IBM Cloudant
All other NoSQL document-centric DB must be installed on premise on in the cloud as complicated clusters. The "as a service" formula and the open source origin were the same reasons for Cloudant choice, freeing us of all system and administration tasks!
Chose IBM Cloudant
Cloudant is a database as a service with a strong support team. The feature set is comparable to other solutions but not all are managed services, or have easy scalability, or can demonstrate production level reliability and performance.
Chose IBM Cloudant
We used to host CouchDB ourselves, but moved to BigCouch at first for scalability and then to Cloudant to reduce the maintenance overheads.
We use Elasticsearch alongside Cloudant these days, since _changes streams make it easy to feed data from Cloudant into Elasticsearch. …
Chose IBM Cloudant
Cloudant blows all of the other competitors out of the water. The robust UI, the scalability, the management console, these are all reasons why Cloudant is a superior product to any of these "competitors". Cloudant is head and shoulders above the rest. It was a pleasure to …
Chose IBM Cloudant
I've even worked with Cassandra, but I found Cloudant to be much simpler, easier, neat and efficient. Cassandra was not highly scalable but Cloudant was much efficient in it. Even the Monitoring and other scripts were pre-built which made it much time efficient for us.
Chose IBM Cloudant
I chose Cloudant because they had the best low end traffic prices while still providing room for pay as you need it scalability. I had an Amazon EC2 instance for a few years and I had to pay so much for it even though it hardly had any traffic. Being connected to IBM helped me …
Couchbase
Chose Couchbase
It is optimized for interactive applications
Chose Couchbase
The project we are developing with Couchbase, was very inconsistent for few years of the beginning. We had to change data model multiple times. We knew this before starting the project. So we had to choose a NoSQL solution. We also wanted a syncing solution. After some research …
Chose Couchbase
I was not involved in the process of evaluating other products.
Chose Couchbase
Google Cloud Spanner meant "vendor lock-in". Yugabyte was pre-mature for us at the time. MySQL was not meant for the size of our data.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase was mainly selected because it provided professional support, which was mandatory. I did not participate in the technical decisions.
Chose Couchbase
We have not used any other product like Couchbase
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase offers p2p sync and offline sync capabilities which gave an advantage over mongo. The sync has filter functions.
Chose Couchbase
Every data storage has it's own application domain. We use it in parallel
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase offers more flexibility, it is more secure and most importantly, it is scalable and therefore affordable.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase is scalable and very secure. It also offers better features and is very capable.
Chose Couchbase
MS Cosmos DB
AWS Storage
Google Storage
Chose Couchbase
[Couchbase] lite has been in use for a long time for a couple of applications.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
Chose Couchbase
At the time, Couchbase seemed the most mature of the NoSQL products and would allow us to achieve the goal of improving data access times for our products and services, giving the most benefit to our customers. MySQL was starting to be the bottleneck in our system performance …
Chose Couchbase
Performance-wise Couchbase is much better than MongoDB.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase being a NoSQL database does not require a fixed schema and allows more flexibility in the development phase.
Chose Couchbase
Easy to deploy and manage. Clustering and replication is fairly simple and straightforward. According to developers, Couchbase scored higher points compared to the other products that we evaluated.
Chose Couchbase
The Apache Cassandra was one type of product used in our company for a couple of use-cases.
The Aerospike is something we [analyzed] not so long time ago as an interesting alternative, due to its performance characteristics.
The Oracle Coherence was and is still being used for …
Chose Couchbase
Single console for managing multi-cluster and multi-cloud deployment options and [the] ability to secure and isolate database information in a secure environment to prevent undefined access is great. Analyzing and delivering information and fast access and processing data …
Chose Couchbase
Experience with DataStax Cassandra was seamless, but the cost and effort to support it was not justified. Also commercial process experience with Couchbase was much better. ActiveSpaces is a good technology for big TIBCO shop, but keeping with the lifecycle of it is not easy. I …
Chose Couchbase
A strategic company, upcoming products, enhanced concepts. Couchbase is a single platform offering many different smaller products together viz Full-Text Search, Analytics, Eventing, Indexing, Querying, Integration with other products.
I also look forward to knowing more about …
Chose Couchbase
None of the products mentioned above provided a seamless synchronization strategy that could be available on-premises at the time.
Features
IBM CloudantCouchbase
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
IBM Cloudant
9.1
Ratings
6% above category average
Couchbase
8.9
Ratings
4% above category average
Performance9.70 Ratings8.90 Ratings
Availability8.30 Ratings9.40 Ratings
Concurrency9.80 Ratings8.90 Ratings
Security8.20 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Scalability9.00 Ratings9.40 Ratings
Data model flexibility9.80 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Small Businesses
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 8.1 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 8.1 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Enterprises
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 8.1 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(0 ratings)
8.9
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.3
(0 ratings)
2.1
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.7
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
8.2
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.2
(0 ratings)
9.3
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.6
(0 ratings)
8.5
(0 ratings)
Online Training
7.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.2
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Configurability
8.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.6
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM CloudantCouchbase
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM Cloudant is the best implementation of CouchDB, or any NoSQL database that you could use if you are looking for a database that can handle extremely rapid writes to a database without having to worry about transactional integrity. IBM Cloudant also abstracts out CouchDB's replication/multi-node requirements and ensures high availability on its own. It also allows map-reduce based indexing which will allow massive databases to be aggregated and queried very quickly. It should not be used in cases where you require structured data which is organized according to a schema, or if you want to maintain ACID database properties.
Read full review
Best suited when edge devices have interrupted internet connection. And Couchbase provides reliable data transfer. If used for attachment Couchbase has a very poor offering. A hard limit of 20 MB is not okay. They have the best conflict resolution but not so great query language on Couchbase lite.
Read full review
Pros
  • We had a small data mart project that required the storage of some rather highly connected data that also had a relatively small footprint. This made IBM Cloudant an obvious choice because we could store the data in a data structure that met our project need al while using a platform that our web development team understood and was comfortable with.
  • We had a bunch of geospatial data that we needed for analysis. Having GeoJSON being natively supported by Cloudant made it an easy choice.
  • Cloudant was cloud-based and didn't require a DBA support it, this allowed the project to move ahead without pushback from the infrastructure team.
Read full review
  • Easy to store unstructured data and has great performance
  • Managing security is super easy which can be managed across different levels
  • UI is pretty simple to use and manage the cluster
  • Backup of the data is very easy and the restoration/recovery is fairly easy as well with the in-built tools.
  • Easy integration with elasticsearch for replication
  • It is fairly easy to scale up or scale down the cluster
Read full review
Cons
  • To have a sort of LUW - Logical Unit Work when many documents are involved into a single update process. The changing of one document is related to its status information but it must be synchronized with all the other documents involved in the process.
Read full review
  • Cluster sizing during the design phase can be improved, especially if the client lacks prior experience. Vendor consultants are very meticulous in order to provide best of class performance and response time, although some more real-world pragmatic approach is often needed.
  • Couchbase Lite 2 went thru a major revamp, which broke the compatibility of the applications with some features removed and other changed. That needed development teams working to refactor the applications.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
the flexibility of NoSQL allow us to modify and upgrade our apps very fast and in a convenient way. Having the solution hosted by IBM is also giving us the chance to focus on features and the improvement of our apps. It's one thing less to be worried about
Read full review
I rarely actually use Couchbase Server, I just stay up-to-date with the features that it provides. However, when the need arises for a NoSQL datastore, then I will strongly consider it as an option
Read full review
Usability
It's mostly just a straight forward API to a data store. I knock one off for the full text search thing, but I don't need it much anyways. Also, the dashboard UI they give is pretty nice to use. It provides syntax-highlighting for writing views and queries are easy to test. I wish other DBs had a UI like this.
Read full review
Couchbase has been quite a usable for our implementation. We had similar experience with our previous "trial" implementation, however it was short lived.
Couchbase has so far exceeded expectation. Our implementation team is more confident than ever before.
When we are Live for more than 6 months, I'm hoping to enhance this rating.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
it is a highly available solution in the IBM cloud portfolio and hence we have never had any issues with the data base being available - we also do continuous replication to be on the safer side just in case some thing goes awry. We also perform twice a year disaster recovery tests.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
very easy to get started and is very developer friendly given that it uses couchDB analytics. It is a cloud based solution and hence there is no hardware investment in a server and staging the server to get started and the associated delays/bureaucracy involved to get started. Good documentation is also available.
Read full review
One of Couchbase’s greatest assets is its performance with large datasets. Properly set up with well-sized clusters, it is also highly reliable and scalable. User management could be better though, and security often feels like an afterthought. Couchbase has improved tremendously since we started using it, so I am sure that these issues will be ironed out.
Read full review
Support Rating
Very happy by the commitment given by the team which has been really good over the last 7 years of usage.
Read full review
I haven't had many opportunities to request support, I will look forward to better the rating. We have technical development and integration team who reach out directly to TAM at Couchbase.
Read full review
Online Training
online resources are good enough to understand but there is nothing like testing. In our case, we discovered some not documented behavior that we take in count now. Also, the experience in NodeJs is critical. Also, take in count that most of the "good practices" with cloudant are not in online courses but in blogs and pages from independent developers
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
  • Test the architecture on CouchDB helped us to address initial design flaws.
  • The migration to Cloudant as such was very painless.
  • We have migrate our replication system to Cloudant Android Sync for mobile devices.
  • We have regular informal contact with the Cloudant leadership to discuss our use cases and implementation strategies.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
MongoDB Atlas and Azure Cosmos DB are the closest competitors we found with Cloudant, especially in terms of fixed pricing and having a GUI for easy viewing and quick edits of data. Cloudant's pricing model flat out beats MongoDB Atlas' in terms of how easy it would be to predict costs. Cosmos DB is a much closer competitor, as it integrates well with Azure's stack similarly to Cloudant and the rest of the IBM Cloud stack; similar [throughout]-based pricing and replication options; and even the GUI and ease of query using SQL, which my team and I were more familiar with. Where Cloudant beats out Cosmos DB is again having a more simple pricing model (ops/sec vs Cosmos' "request units" voodoo) and being based on open-source software assuaging fears of vendor lock-in.
Read full review
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
Read full review
Scalability
The service scales incredibly well. As you would expect from CloudDB and IBM combination. The only reason I wouldn't score it a 10 is the fact that document trees can get nested and nested very quickly if you are attempting to do very complex datasets. Which makes your code that much more complex to deal. Its very possible we could find a solution to this problem with better database planning to begin with, but one of the reasons we chose a service over a self-hosted solution was so we could set it up quick and forget about it. So we weren't going to dedicate a team to architecture optimization.
Read full review
So far, the way that we mange and upgrade our clusters has be very smooth. It works like a dream when we use it in concert with AWS and their EC2 machines. Having access to powerful instances along side the Couchbase interface is amazing and allows us to do rebalances or maintenance without a worry
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Saving in-terms of cost of procuring and maintaining hardware, which will be realized over the next 5 years.
  • Positive ROI in terms of the number of FTEs involved in maintaining our databases; our DBAs can now focus on other important and business critical applications.
  • Best ROI in terms of our organization's vision - they are no longer anxious / nervous to move to the cloud. We are already on the CLOUD.
Read full review
  • There have been several areas of our application [that] really needed an ACID compliant database (e.g. strong transactional guarantees) that we thought we could work around while using Couchbase. [In my opinion] that turned out to be a poor bet. You need to be certain that the specific characteristics of a NoSQL database fit your problem.
  • Couchbase does eliminate the need for schema upgrades completely. I.e no downtime or conversion windows as you migrate your data model, adding attributes, etc. This helped with the deployment timeframe associated with DB changes.
  • The database is (apparently) a bit more of a space/memory consumer than originally anticipated. During deployments, we received constant pressure from Couchbase consulting teams to eliminate/reduce the number of indexes, and this was because any mutations to docs in a bucket must check for impact against all indexes. More recent years have started to address this with their "collections" features, which helps isolate indexes to specific sub-groupings of documents.
Read full review
ScreenShots