Google Cloud Firestore vs Neo4j Graph Database comparison

Google and Neo4j are both solutions in the NoSQL Databases category. Google is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.3, while Neo4j is ranked #8 with an average rating of 9.0. Google holds a 2.7% mindshare in ND, compared to Neo4j’s 6.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Google users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Neo4j users who would recommend it.

Google Cloud Firestore

Read 3 Google Cloud Firestore reviews

581 Views
331 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Neo4j Graph Database

Read 6 Neo4j Graph Database reviews

1,078 Views
938 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Google Cloud Firestore

Neo4j Graph Database

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

Neo4j Graph Database and Google Cloud Firestore are competitive products in the database marketplace. Google Cloud Firestore often takes the lead due to its extensive feature set, making it appealing for scalability and integration priorities.

Features: Neo4j Graph Database handles complex relationships and queries through its native graph structure, making it suitable for applications needing intricate data connections. It is ideal for graph-specific applications and offers pricing tailored to those needs. Google Cloud Firestore provides robust integration with the Google Cloud ecosystem, real-time data synchronization, and seamless integration with other cloud services, appealing to a wider range of applications due to its comprehensive features.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Deployment for Neo4j Graph Database can be intensive, requiring expertise in graph technologies. Its customer service is geared towards specific needs. Google Cloud Firestore offers straightforward cloud-based deployment with support from Google’s infrastructure, providing a smoother setup experience for cloud operations, making it accessible for rapid integration and support.

Pricing and ROI: Neo4j Graph Database presents competitive pricing with structured ROI for enterprises focused on graph-database capabilities, proving cost-effective in targeted environments. Google Cloud Firestore setup costs are generally higher due to its feature set and scalability, offering significant ROI for larger projects needing an integrated cloud solution. The choice depends on specific business needs and budget considerations.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,114 peers since 2012

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

Google Cloud Firestore

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

13th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed NoSQL Databases (11th)

Neo4j Graph Database

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

8th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Google Cloud Firestore is 2.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Neo4j Graph Database is 6.2%, up from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

NoSQL Databases Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Neo4j Graph Database	6.2%
Google Cloud Firestore	2.7%
Other	91.1%

NoSQL Databases

Featured Reviews

PrathapSankar

engagement Manager at Capgemini

Has simplified backend development for moderate user applications and supports efficient real-time data updates

A simplified way of building a logical layer on top of Firebase is necessary. Currently, the only option is to use cloud functions or Cloud Run functions. If they come up with an easier way of handling the logical layer between the frontend and backend, that would be beneficial. The UI of Firebase is much better compared to AWS or other Azure, but there is still scope for improving the usability of the UI. Additionally, some more AI features for automation can be added. The security layer can be enhanced, as currently, for data handling, there is just rule-based security; they can add one more layer of data security.

Read full review

Raju Tsn

VP odfTechnology at Enterpi Software Solutions Private Limited

Delivers superior search and data aggregation capabilities

Neo4j helps with advanced search needs, providing good search results and aggregates compared to MongoDB. Aggregating with MongoDB can be difficult; however, with Neo4j, it's easier. Aggregating data, backing up, and creating new clusters are user-friendly from the back end. In DevOps web deployment, we noticed no database issues. We created Docker instances and set them up efficiently, managing databases up to 50 gigabytes.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the main features of Google Cloud Firestore's document management is the real-time listener; whenever there are any changes in the data, all the documents and applications that are reading through that particular document get automatically notified that there was some change, and automatically all the data gets refreshed."

"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."

"For now, the tool doesn't break down or stop, so it is quite stable."

"As a graph database, I am surprised at their performance and response time."

"Enables people to understand what the business problem is and how the technology helps."

"Creates the ability to visualize outputs."

"It is good for search-based tasks, providing solid search results and aggregate results."

"The solution's best feature is how it differs from traditional SQL databases. It's hard to map people and find those near me in SQL, which requires long, complex queries. Neo4j Graph Database makes this easier with simpler queries. It also supports more data types, like JSON, which SQL doesn't."

Cons

"For lower volumes, it works fine, but once the volume increases, for use cases where the total number of users is less than 100,000 a month, Firebase is cheaper. But once you go beyond that, it becomes very expensive."

"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."

"I initially faced a problem creating groups in individual chats."

"There are concerns about performance and whether the tool can necessarily scale to provide the solution."

"The tool could improve by having more resources, especially for Golang, which we use. It lacks good basic libraries and doesn't have an ORM (Object-Relational Mapping) tool, which many NoSQL databases have. We thought about building an ORM for the Neo4j Graph Database but are too busy."

"The only problem is that the community is quite small."

"So far, we have not had any issues and are happy with the product in general."

"For me, when the tool was deployed on an on-premises model, it was a little bit difficult the first time."

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The tool is not expensive."

"The solution is open source so that you can use it for free. They also offer an enterprise version with its billing. If your company is earning well, I suggest using the enterprise version. Otherwise, you can deploy it on your own cloud and pay based on usage."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

University

13%

Government

12%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

10%

Energy/Utilities Company

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Google Cloud Firestore?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Firestore?

Firebase is our main backend, so for managing authentications, for managing the backend database, and building cloud functions, it is all through Firebase. In the case of Google Cloud Firestore, th...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Google Cloud Firestore?

I have experience with Firebase, especially Firebase, then Google Cloud Computing Engine, and then Google Firebase Studio. Google Cloud Firestore is one of the offerings in Firebase, which is basic...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Neo4j?

The solution is open source so that you can use it for free. They also offer an enterprise version with its billing. If your company is earning well, I suggest using the enterprise version. Otherwi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Neo4j Graph Database?

The only problem is that the community is quite small.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Neo4j Graph Database?

We have used Neo4j in microservices. In one of the microservices, we used Neo4j since we have some requirements similar to MongoDB plus Elasticsearch. It performs both functions. Instead of doing t...

See all answers

Comparisons

MongoDB Atlas vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 27% of the time

Couchbase Enterprise vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 13% of the time

Amazon DynamoDB vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 12% of the time

Redis vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 12% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 12% of the time

More Google Cloud Firestore Competitors

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 26% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 16% of the time

Cassandra vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 9% of the time

SQL Server vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 8% of the time

DataStax Enterprise vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 8% of the time

More Neo4j Graph Database Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

NoSQL Databases

January 2026

Download Google Cloud Firestore product report

Buyer's Guide

Neo4j Graph Database

January 2026

Download Neo4j Graph Database product report

Overview

Google Cloud Firestore is a scalable, real-time NoSQL cloud database that provides document-oriented data storage and synchronizes data seamlessly across devices.

Designed for mobile, web, and server development, Firestore allows developers to store and sync data quickly. It supports real-time updates which enable your applications to reflect changes instantly. Firestore is based on a managed infrastructure, relieving developers from server-side maintenance and scalability concerns. It integrates with other Google Cloud services making it a convenient choice for modern app development.

What are the key features?

Real-Time Updates: Firestore automatically synchronizes data across all connected clients in real-time.
Scaling: Dynamically scales to accommodate growing data and user demands.
Offline Persistence: Stores data locally so that applications remain usable in offline mode.
Database Queries: Supports sophisticated queries to filter and retrieve data efficiently.
Security: Provides robust rules-based security for data control.

What benefits and ROI considerations should users review?

Improved Development Speed: Simplifies syncing and storing data, saving development time.
Cost-Effective: Pay-as-you-go pricing model ensures costs align with usage.
Efficiency: Reduced need for backend development enhances productivity.
Reliability: Rest assured with dependable infrastructure that ensures availability.

Firestore is widely used in industries like retail, where apps require real-time inventory tracking and customer insights. In health tech, it's utilized for patient data management, ensuring real-time updates across platforms while adhering to security protocols. Educational tech companies implement the database to provide an interactive learning experience with live collaboration features.

Google

Neo4j is the graph database solution allowing the analysis of complex relationships and patterns in data, leading to better decision-making and improved business processes. The graph database offers easy data integration from multiple sources, providing a more comprehensive view.

The most valuable aspect of a graph database is its performance and response time, as it does not use the join function and only has nodes and raw data. Overall, Neo4j, as a global first-ranking solution, has helped organizations become more efficient and effective in data analysis and decision-making processes.

Neo4j

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Walmart, Telenor, Wazoku, Adidas, Cerved, GameSys, eBay, Schleich, ICIJ, die Bayerisch, Megree, InfoJobs, LinkedIn

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database

December 2025

Free Report: Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database

Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Google Cloud Firestore vs. Neo4j Graph Database report.

See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.

We monitor all NoSQL Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.