Teable vs NocoDB
Both are alternatives to Airtable. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as NocoDB vs Teable — same comparison, one verdict.
Teable is open source (AGPL-3.0 (Community Edition); Enterprise Edition under a separate commercial license) and NocoDB is not (Sustainable Use License v1.0 (source-available, fair-code; not OSI-approved) — changed from AGPL-3.0 in Jan 2026) — so the real question is whether you want to own the no-code databases stack or rent it.
Teable
AGPL-3.0 no-code interface built directly on PostgreSQL, designed to scale to millions of rows.
Teable is a no-code database that puts a fast, spreadsheet-like Airtable-style interface directly on top of PostgreSQL. Because your data lives in a real Postgres database you control, it handles large tables well and stays queryable with standard SQL tools. The Community Edition is AGPL-3.0 and free to self-host via Docker. A separate Enterprise Edition adds features such as AI, an authority matrix, automation, and advanced admin under a commercial license, so confirm the CE covers what you need before deploying.
NocoDB
Turns an existing SQL database into a smart no-code interface; now source-available, not OSI open-source.
NocoDB puts an Airtable-style no-code interface (grid, kanban, gallery, calendar, forms) on top of a database you already run — MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, and more — which gives it excellent data ownership, since your records stay in your own standard SQL database. It is free to self-host via Docker for internal use. Important licensing note: as of January 2026 NocoDB moved from AGPL-3.0 to the Sustainable Use License (SUL), a source-available "fair-code" license — many secondary sites still list the old AGPL label. Self-hosting for your own internal or personal use remains free; offering NocoDB itself as a hosted or managed service to others requires a commercial license.
Side by side
10 points of comparison, every one read from a verified field. Green marks the side that wins a row outright. A dash means we do not hold that fact — never that it is zero.
| Teable | NocoDB | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 91 | 78 |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 (Community Edition); Enterprise Edition under a separate commercial license | Sustainable Use License v1.0 (source-available, fair-code; not OSI-approved) — changed from AGPL-3.0 in Jan 2026 |
| Pricing | Free to self-host (Community Edition); paid cloud and Enterprise Edition tiers available | Free to self-host for internal/personal use; commercial license required to offer it as a managed service; paid cloud available |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | 4 GB. That is the vendor's stated minimum for the app, PostgreSQL and Redis together, and Teable publishes no higher recommended figure. Treat it as the floor and watch memory once tables grow large | 8 GB. That is the vendor's production specification, with 4 vCPU and 50 GB+ disk; its 2 GB minimum is for trying it out |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | $12–24/mo for a 5-user instance on a 4 GB VPS. PostgreSQL and Redis run in the same compose file; S3 or MinIO is needed only if you move attachments off the disk | $24–48/mo on an 8 GB VPS. The installer runs PostgreSQL, Redis and Traefik on the same box, so nothing else is required |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | 30 minutes with the standalone compose file; half a day with a domain, HTTPS and object storage | 20 minutes with the install script and a domain ready; longer if you bring your own database |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | Teable ships several releases a week under the latest tag, so pin a dated release tag and upgrade on purpose, with a PostgreSQL dump before each jump. Budget an hour a month. | About two releases a month; run the bundled update.sh deliberately against a pinned tag. The vendor's minimum backup is a daily pg_dump plus a tarball of attachments, because everything lives in Docker volumes. |
Teable edges it on the Sovereignty Score, but the right pick depends on the trade-offs below.
Weighing both against staying on Airtable? Is Airtable free? What it actually costs →
Teable
Strengths
- +Community Edition is AGPL-3.0, a strong copyleft OSI-approved license
- +Data lives in standard PostgreSQL you control, so it stays accessible with normal SQL tooling
- +Built to handle large datasets (millions of rows) without hard row caps when self-hosted
- +Very active project with frequent releases and rapid feature development
Trade-offs
- −Several higher-end features (AI, automation, authority matrix, advanced admin) are Enterprise-only under a commercial license
- −Self-hosting requires running and maintaining PostgreSQL and the app stack
- −Younger project than Grist, so some areas are still maturing
- −AGPL-3.0 copyleft terms may need legal review for certain redistribution scenarios
NocoDB
Strengths
- +Sits on top of your own MySQL/PostgreSQL/SQLite database, so your data stays in a standard SQL store you control
- +Free to self-host for internal and personal use, with full source access
- +Familiar no-code views (grid, kanban, gallery, calendar, forms) plus an automatic REST API
- +Extremely active project with a very large community and frequent releases
Trade-offs
- −License is source-available (Sustainable Use License), not OSI-approved open-source, and restricts offering NocoDB itself as a paid/managed service
- −The Jan 2026 relicense from AGPL-3.0 means older "AGPL" references you may find are out of date
- −Self-hosting means running and maintaining the app and its backing database
- −As an interface layer, it depends on a separate SQL database you provision and manage
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Teable
if you want the source and the option to fork it, and community Edition is AGPL-3.0, a strong copyleft OSI-approved license.
Choose NocoDB
if sits on top of your own MySQL/PostgreSQL/SQLite database, so your data stays in a standard SQL store you control.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — several higher-end features (AI, automation, authority matrix, advanced admin) are Enterprise-only under a commercial license, and license is source-available (Sustainable Use License), not OSI-approved open-source, and restricts offering NocoDB itself as a paid/managed service. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
What it takes to run these yourself
Real requirements and honest running costs, not the vendor quickstart.
Self-hosting Teable
4 GB. That is the vendor's stated minimum for the app, PostgreSQL and Redis together, and Teable publishes no higher recommended figure. Treat it as the floor and watch memory once tables grow large RAM · 30 minutes with the standalone compose file; half a day with a domain, HTTPS and object storage
$12–24/mo for a 5-user instance on a 4 GB VPS. PostgreSQL and Redis run in the same compose file; S3 or MinIO is needed only if you move attachments off the disk
Self-hosting NocoDB
8 GB. That is the vendor's production specification, with 4 vCPU and 50 GB+ disk; its 2 GB minimum is for trying it out RAM · 20 minutes with the install script and a domain ready; longer if you bring your own database
$24–48/mo on an 8 GB VPS. The installer runs PostgreSQL, Redis and Traefik on the same box, so nothing else is required
Teable vs NocoDB — common questions
Is Teable a better fit than NocoDB for no-code databases?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Teable scores 91 to NocoDB's 78 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. NocoDB earns its place on a different axis — sits on top of your own MySQL/PostgreSQL/SQLite database, so your data stays in a standard SQL store you control. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Teable keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. NocoDB is still self-hostable, so the files stay on your server either way — but it is not local-first by design, so check what its export produces before you rely on it.
Can I self-host Teable or NocoDB?
Both can be self-hosted. The difference is what it costs you in time rather than whether it is possible — see the setup and maintenance rows above.
Are Teable and NocoDB both alternatives to Airtable?
Yes — both appear in our Airtable comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Airtable and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
More Airtable head-to-heads
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-07-18. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.