Revdoku vs Koyeb
Revdoku publishes static files and websites from AI agents. Koyeb runs applications and databases on serverless infrastructure. A static frontend can fit either service, but only Koyeb is designed to execute backend code and containers.
This comparison uses Koyeb’s current documentation rather than the older “550 free compute hours” wording still repeated by some directories.
Quick comparison
| Capability | Revdoku | Koyeb |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | AI-created static sites, reports, and shared files | Serverless web services, APIs, workers, and databases |
| First publish | Public 24-hour preview without signup | Account plus Git, Docker, CLI, or API deployment |
| Free starting point | Free account keeps up to 100 permanent public sites | One documented free instance: 512 MB RAM, 0.1 vCPU, 2 GB SSD |
| Server-side compute | No general runtime | Containers and supported buildpacks |
| Database | Website publishing is the core comparison | Free PostgreSQL service is documented with current resource limits |
| Custom domains and SSL | One custom domain on Free | Custom domains with automatic TLS |
| Default domain | Randomized revdoku.site name on Free |
Generated koyeb.app address |
| AI-agent publishing | Direct from supported AI clients | Possible through developer tooling, not the primary no-account flow |
| Free analytics | Not included | Service metrics are available; visitor analytics are a separate concern |
Choose Revdoku when
Choose Revdoku when the output is already static and the shortest route to a public URL matters more than runtime control. It avoids a cloud project for the first preview.
Choose Koyeb when
Choose Koyeb when the project needs a long-running web process, API, Docker image, environment variables, autoscaling, or managed PostgreSQL.
Key difference
Koyeb is a compute platform. Revdoku is a publishing service. Static deliverables are simpler on Revdoku; dynamic application workloads need a platform such as Koyeb.
Sources checked
Compare more website hosting options.