Inngest vs Trigger.dev: Which is Better in 2026?
Choosing between Inngest and Trigger.dev? Both are popular background jobs & workflows tools. Below we compare them on pricing, free tiers, features, and pros & cons so you can pick the right fit for your stack.
Inngest is for: TypeScript, Python and Go teams who want durable multi-step functions and event-driven jobs without running queue infrastructure.
Trigger.dev is for: TypeScript teams running long background tasks and AI agent jobs who want managed workers billed per second of compute.
Quick verdict
There’s no single winner; pick on your constraint. Choose Inngest if you want multi-step functions where each step retries and keeps its state, without running queues or workers. Choose Trigger.dev if you write jobs in TypeScript and want them to run on managed machines rather than inside your web server.
Inngest vs Trigger.dev — Side by Side
| Inngest | Trigger.dev | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Background Jobs & Workflows | Background Jobs & Workflows |
| What it is | Hosted durable workflow platform | Managed background job platform |
| Languages | TypeScript, Python, Go, Kotlin | TypeScript |
| What it runs on | Inngest Cloud or self-hosted; steps run in your app | Trigger.dev managed workers or self-hosted |
| How you pay | Monthly plan plus per-execution overage | Monthly plan with usage credit; per-second compute |
| Free access | 50,000 executions a month | $5 of compute credit a month |
| Pricing | Free · paid from $99/mo | Free · paid from $10/mo |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Free tier | ||
| Rating | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Best for | Background Jobs & Workflows — durable functions, event-driven jobs, serverless apps | Background Jobs & Workflows — TypeScript jobs, long-running tasks, AI agents |
Pros & Cons
- No infrastructure to run
- Durable multi-step workflows
- Event-driven + cron in one model
- Great local dev experience
- Execution-based pricing can add up at scale
- Newer ecosystem than Celery/Sidekiq
- Open-source and self-hostable
- Write jobs in plain TypeScript
- No execution timeouts
- Strong AI-agent/workflow tooling
- TypeScript/Node only
- Self-hosting adds operational work
Key Features Compared
Inngest
- Free: 50,000 executions a month, 5 concurrent steps, 5 seats and 24-hour trace history; work pauses at the quota
- Pro from $99 a month with 1M executions, 100 concurrent steps and 7-day trace history
- Pro overage: $50 per extra 1M executions
- Business from $499 a month with 10M executions and 14-day trace history; Enterprise custom
- Self-hosting supported since the 1.0 release, on SQLite by default or your own Postgres and Redis
- SDKs for TypeScript, Python, Go and Kotlin
Trigger.dev
- Free: $5 of compute credit a month, 20 concurrent runs, 10 schedules and 1-day log retention
- Hobby $10 a month with $10 of credit and 50 concurrent runs
- Pro $50 a month with $50 of credit, 200 concurrent runs, 25 team members and 30-day logs
- Compute billed per second from $0.0000169 on the smallest machine, plus $0.25 per 10,000 runs
- Runs in the dev environment are not charged
- Open source under Apache-2.0, with Docker and Kubernetes self-hosting guides
Choose Inngest if…
- You want multi-step functions where each step retries and keeps its state, without running queues or workers.
- You trigger background work from events and cron schedules in the same codebase.
- You deploy to serverless platforms and want jobs to run inside your existing app.
Choose Trigger.dev if…
- Budget is tight — paid plans start lower ($10/mo vs $99/mo).
- You write jobs in TypeScript and want them to run on managed machines rather than inside your web server.
- Your tasks run for minutes or hours, such as AI agent steps or media processing.
- You want to self-host the same open-source platform later.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Inngest better than Trigger.dev?⌄
There’s no single winner; pick on your constraint. Choose Inngest if you want multi-step functions where each step retries and keeps its state, without running queues or workers. Choose Trigger.dev if you write jobs in TypeScript and want them to run on managed machines rather than inside your web server.
What is the difference between Inngest and Trigger.dev?⌄
What it is — Inngest: Hosted durable workflow platform. Trigger.dev: Managed background job platform. Languages — Inngest: TypeScript, Python, Go, Kotlin. Trigger.dev: TypeScript. What it runs on — Inngest: Inngest Cloud or self-hosted; steps run in your app. Trigger.dev: Trigger.dev managed workers or self-hosted. How you pay — Inngest: Monthly plan plus per-execution overage. Trigger.dev: Monthly plan with usage credit; per-second compute. Free access — Inngest: 50,000 executions a month. Trigger.dev: $5 of compute credit a month.
Inngest vs Trigger.dev: which is cheaper?⌄
Inngest pricing: Free · paid from $99/mo. Trigger.dev pricing: Free · paid from $10/mo. Confirm current pricing on each tool's official site, as plans change.
Which is rated higher, Inngest or Trigger.dev?⌄
In our catalog, Inngest rates 4.6 out of 5 and Trigger.dev rates 4.6 out of 5 — they are evenly matched.
When should I skip both Inngest and Trigger.dev?⌄
Skip Inngest if your jobs are simple and you already run Redis. BullMQ runs on your own Redis with no per-execution bill. Skip Trigger.dev if your team writes Python or Go. Inngest and Hatchet have SDKs for both.
Sources · tool facts checked November 2026
See more options in our guide to the best background jobs & workflows tools for startups.
Still not sure which to pick?
Get a free, AI-powered tech stack — including the best background jobs & workflows pick for your budget and team — in 60 seconds.