What's the difference between Trigger.dev and Inngest?
Quick Answer: Trigger.dev is a fully Apache 2.0 durable runner with task-based authoring, machine-size selection, and first-class self-host. Inngest is a developer-first event-driven step platform with an open-source dev server, a managed cloud, 50,000 step runs/month free, and $20/month Hobby pricing.
Trigger.dev vs Inngest: Direct Comparison
Trigger.dev (2022, London, Apache 2.0) and Inngest (2021, San Francisco, OSS dev server plus managed cloud) are both TypeScript-first durable runners but ship different programming models and license postures.
Programming Model
Trigger.dev v3 uses task-based authoring with retries, concurrency limits, and machine-size selection per task. Tasks are compiled and deployed via CLI to the Trigger.dev runtime.
Inngest uses event-driven step authoring. A function listens on an event or schedule and runs sequential or parallel step.run, step.sleep, step.waitForEvent, and step.sendEvent calls, each independently retryable.
License and Self-Host
Trigger.dev is fully Apache 2.0 across the platform with first-class self-host via Docker Compose or Kubernetes. Inngest open-sources the dev server only; the production cloud is proprietary, with self-host available on enterprise plans.
Pricing (May 2026)
- Trigger.dev: Hobby free tier; Pro from $20/month with run and machine fees; self-host zero license cost
- Inngest: Free 50K step runs/month; Hobby $20/month; Pro $50-$500/month tiers
When Each Wins
Trigger.dev wins when the Apache 2.0 license is decisive (compliance, sovereignty, open-source policy) or self-host on the team's own infrastructure is a first-class requirement. Inngest wins when event-driven step semantics fit the workflow shape better than task-based jobs and managed cloud with zero ops is the priority.
For deeper analysis, see the Trigger.dev vs Inngest 2026 comparison guide.
Related Questions
Related Tools
Trigger.dev
Open-source background jobs and durable workflows platform for TypeScript developers.
Workflow AutomationInngest
Durable workflow and background job platform for TypeScript and Python services.
Workflow AutomationHatchet
Open-source distributed task queue and workflow engine for Python, TypeScript, and Go services.
Workflow AutomationTemporal Workflows
Build applications that never lose state, even when everything else fails.
Workflow AutomationRelated Rankings
Best Automation Platforms for AI Orchestration 2026
This ranking answers one question: how many real business applications can an AI agent act on out of the box? It evaluates nine platforms as of August 2026 on the reach they give an agent, not on the workflow logic they can express. That boundary is deliberate, because two neighbouring pages on this site answer different questions. Best Process Orchestration Platforms 2026 scores multi-step process control, error handling and state management. Best AI Agent Platforms 2026 scores building and hosting the agent itself. This page scores the layer between them: the connective tissue that lets an agent already built elsewhere reach the applications a business actually runs on. A platform that leads one of those pages can place low here, and two of them do. Scores derive from application and action catalogue counts, the exposure model each platform uses to publish those catalogues to an agent, setup effort, failure handling and cost per agent action. Every figure was retrieved from a vendor-owned surface on 11 August 2026 unless an earlier date is stated against it.
Best Durable Workflow Engines for Production in 2026
A ranked list of the best durable workflow engines for production deployments in 2026. Durable workflow engines persist execution state to a database so that long-running workflows survive process restarts, deployments, and infrastructure failures. The ranking covers Temporal, Prefect, Apache Airflow, Camunda, Windmill, and n8n. Tools were evaluated on production reliability, developer experience, scalability, open-source health, and documentation quality. The shortlist intentionally mixes code-first engines (Temporal, Prefect, Airflow) with hybrid visual platforms (Camunda, Windmill, n8n) to reflect how production teams actually choose workflow engines in 2026.
Dive Deeper
Client Portals vs Workflow Orchestration Platforms: What Changes When External Parties Act Inside a Process
What changes when a client or supplier has to act inside your process, not just watch it? This guide compares four client portals with four orchestration platforms on how outsiders get in, whether you pay for them and what the audit log records, from vendor sources read 14 and 15 September 2026.
Moxo vs Zapier in 2026: Human Approval Steps, External Participants and Pricing
Moxo and Zapier both put a person in front of an automated decision, from opposite ends: Moxo builds the process out of human steps and attaches AI, while Zapier pauses an automation for a reviewer through its Human in the Loop app. This guide compares approvers, rejection, AI approval, audit logs, governance and pricing, verified 14 and 15 September 2026.
Keystroke vs n8n in 2026: Agent-Built TypeScript vs the Visual Canvas
Keystroke, launched in July 2026 by Y Combinator W24 company Sprint Labs, is a code-first automation platform where AI coding agents write workflows as TypeScript in the user's repository. n8n, founded in 2019, is the most widely deployed source-available visual workflow platform, with 200,000+ users and a $2.5 billion valuation. This comparison covers the agent-authored versus canvas building models, durable execution, licensing (Elastic License 2.0 vs the Sustainable Use License), verified July 2026 pricing including Keystroke's usage metering, and the maturity gap between a days-old platform and an established ecosystem.