Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon DynamoDB vs Google Cloud Firestore comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon DynamoDB
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Firestore
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
NoSQL Databases (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Amazon DynamoDB is 16.6%, down from 23.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Firestore is 3.9%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

MohamedBouzidi - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlined data management with robust automation and easy replication
Amazon DynamoDB has been a reliable service that is very performant and meets our expectations. Its automation capacity reduces the need for more personnel, which aligns perfectly with our strategy of focusing on serverless services. The ease of data replication between regions is a significant benefit since it was already integrated into the solution.
AnthonyAbah - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time syncing boosts productivity with efficient data management
The most valuable features are Firestore's query capabilities and its real-time syncing functionality. The queries are efficient, apart from some limitations. Real-time syncing allows any changes at the backend to automatically appear at the frontend. This is highly useful as it eliminates the need to reload the browser to see the updates.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features of the solution are its price and stability."
"The platform is easy to develop and configure."
"The fact that Amazon DynamoDB is highly scalable is one of its best features."
"Offers a vital query-handling feature"
"Storing is a valuable feature. We can store as an entire object rather than the traditional structure of the data."
"Amazon DynamoDB is serverless and fast, and we can use different keys along with it in our code."
"The possibility of managing documents is the most valuable aspect of the solution. I like the fact that I don't have to define the fields."
"The best feature of the solution is that it is a NoSQL database."
"The most valuable features are Firestore's query capabilities and its real-time syncing functionality."
"I use the solution for maps, saving some locations, and chats."
 

Cons

"The response time for data queries should be less than a second"
"Currently, there is no option for a scheduled refresh in this solution. We want the data to be populated into DynamoDB on a timely basis. Currently, you have to go to the DynamoDB table and hit the refresh button to populate it with the new data. If you have connected DynamoDB to a BI application for creating visualizations with charts, graphs, or other things, you would want it to get updated as per the schedule so that you have updated visualizations in your BI application."
"The solution's interface is the biggest challenge because if you want to access DynamoDB, you need an AWS account."
"The documentation is not good enough."
"Querying data on the solution is quite limited, but this is like any other NoSQL database. It's the most common criticism of the NoSQL database in general."
"Amazon DynamoDB can be quite expensive due to regional differences, so I have to be careful with the pricing."
"Data integrity across availability zones would be a valuable addition. Currently, DynamoDB provides eventual consistency across availability zones, but strong consistency would be beneficial for certain use cases."
"I'd like to see better integration with Cognito. It has the integration, but I'd like to see a little more ease of setup. If you have multiple customers and you want the database to enforce who can see what, you can treat DynamoDB so that each row has permissions. You can set this up, but it's a little more of a science project to make Cognito and DynamoDB work well to do protection of individual rows. So I'd like that to be more wizard or easy to set up."
"I initially faced a problem creating groups in individual chats."
"Firestore needs improvements in its querying capabilities, particularly the ability to join tables and merge data from different tables before sending it to the front end."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is based on Lambda function usage. So, if a Lambda function is invoked with every call, and we receive 5,000 calls daily, that means 5,000 Lambda invocations."
"Compared to a high-end relational database, it's cheap."
"You can get committed capacity or transaction-based pricing. If you're doing it on demand, they charge based on whether you're reading or writing. They charge $1.25 for every million rights to the database and 25 cents for every million reads from the database. The first 25 gigabytes of storage are free, and they charge 25 cents a gigabyte a month. So, it's a very different world. It's a quarter a gigabyte a month. You can store a lot of data. They have a separate fee for automated backup, and if you want it globally distributed, where it's distributed around the world, there's a slightly different price."
"The solution is cheaper than Cosmos DB."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a high price and ten is a low price, I rate the pricing a seven. It is not the cheapest, but it is not the costliest either."
"It is costly. To reduce the costs, users need to read the node in front of it. For read-heavy groups, cache optimization can help manage costs.I can't disclose specific pricing, but it's competitive compared to others in the market, and this information is easily accessible online"
"I would rate the pricing for this solution a four out of five."
"Amazon DynamoDB is a cheap solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon DynamoDB?
The user interface could be improved to make it more intuitive. From a design and solution perspective, it's really good, but the interface always has room for enhancement.
What is your primary use case for Amazon DynamoDB?
We use Amazon DynamoDB for data lookups with the consultancy.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Firestore?
Firestore needs improvements in its querying capabilities, particularly the ability to join tables and merge data from different tables before sending it to the front end. The pricing model is also...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Firestore?
I use Google Cloud Firestore for user management and data storage, primarily for web applications. Firestore helps sync data between different users and stores documents efficiently.
What advice do you have for others considering Google Cloud Firestore?
I highly recommend Google Cloud Firestore due to its cost-effectiveness and real-time syncing capabilities. However, it needs improvements in querying functionalities and a simplified pricing model.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, Snapchat, Capital One, Expedia, Tinder, Airbnb, Comcast, Lyft, Redfin, Netflix, Adobe
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon DynamoDB vs. Google Cloud Firestore and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.