Backblaze B2 vs Wasabi
Why people compare these: Buyers compare them when choosing a cost-driven object store for backups/media and the real decision is pricing mechanics under their access pattern
The real trade-off: Two cost-driven storage models: request-and-egress mechanics vs policy and pricing constraints for large-footprint backups
Common mistake: Assuming both are ‘cheap S3’ instead of modeling restore frequency, requests, and policy constraints that change total cost
At-a-glance comparison
Backblaze B2 ↗
Cost-driven object storage for backups and media libraries, often evaluated versus Wasabi and S3 when the decision is pricing mechanics (egress + requests) rather than raw storage price.
- ✓ Often chosen for cost-driven storage economics in backup and media use cases
- ✓ S3-compatible API option supports many common tools and workflows
- ✓ Good fit when storage footprint is large and hyperscaler complexity is unnecessary
Wasabi ↗
Cost-driven, S3-compatible object storage commonly evaluated for backups and large storage footprints. Buyers choose it when predictable storage economics matters more than hyperscaler ecosystem…
- ✓ Commonly chosen for cost-driven economics on large storage footprints
- ✓ S3-compatible API surface reduces migration friction for many tools
- ✓ Good fit for backup and archive workflows where storage volume is high
Where each product pulls ahead
These are the distinctive advantages that matter most in this comparison.
Backblaze B2 advantages
- ✓ Clear fit for cost-driven backups/media when access pattern is modeled
- ✓ S3-style workflows for many tools with predictable integration approach
- ✓ Often compelling as an alternative to hyperscaler complexity for storage-heavy workloads
Wasabi advantages
- ✓ Often chosen for large-footprint backup/archive economics
- ✓ S3-compatible workflows for many backup and archive tools
- ✓ Simple operational model when policy terms match access behavior
Pros & Cons
Backblaze B2
Pros
- + You can model request volume and egress under your real restore behavior
- + Your use case is backups/archives/media and you want cost-driven mechanics
- + You’re comfortable validating S3-compatible tooling assumptions
- + Your restore frequency is predictable and you’re optimizing total cost
- + You don’t need hyperscaler enterprise governance for this workload
Cons
- − Not a hyperscaler ecosystem; governance and integrations can be narrower
- − Request-heavy or restore-heavy access patterns can change economics materially
- − Region footprint and latency/performance expectations must be validated
- − Advanced features and integrations may not match hyperscaler parity
Wasabi
Pros
- + Your storage footprint is large and you’re optimizing for predictable storage economics
- + Your access pattern is stable enough to validate policy constraints up front
- + Your primary use case is backups/archives with planned restore behavior
- + You want S3-compatible workflows without hyperscaler governance overhead
- + You can validate region footprint and performance for your users
Cons
- − Not a hyperscaler ecosystem; integrations and enterprise governance breadth may be limited
- − Pricing mechanics and policy constraints can change fit depending on access pattern
- − Egress and retrieval behavior still matters for restore-heavy workloads
- − Region footprint and performance expectations must be validated for your users
Which one tends to fit which buyer?
These are conditional guidelines only — not rankings. Your specific situation determines fit.
- → Pick Backblaze B2 if: You want cost-driven mechanics and can model requests/egress based on real restore and access patterns
- → Pick Wasabi if: You’re storage-heavy and want cost-driven economics as long as policy constraints match how you access and restore data
- → Don’t optimize for storage $/GB—restore frequency, requests, and constraints usually decide total cost
- → The trade-off: cost mechanics tuned to your access pattern vs policy constraints and footprint-driven economics
Sources & verification
We prefer to link primary references (official pricing, documentation, and public product pages). If links are missing, treat this as a seeded brief until verification is completed.