FlightControl Home

Flightcontrol vs Porter

Flightcontrol is reportedly easier to use and has a number of unique advantages​

Porter is also built by good people. We are both Y Combinator companies working to make AWS app deployments easier.

On the surface, we are similar in that we both automate the provisioning of infrastructure and the deployment of applications. But as you dig in, there are important differences.

All the following are unique advantages you get with Flightcontrol vs Porter.

Simpler to manage

Flightcontrol deploys to AWS Fargate, which is fully managed for you. But with Porter, you need to create and manage a Kubernetes cluster. It’s not hard, but there are more concepts your team must learn and more things to manage and monitor.

Yes, Kubernetes is technically more powerful and flexible, and we will add support for it too. But you need specialized Kubernetes skills to take advantage of that flexibility. You don't get extra power or flexibility just by using Porter. You're on your own when it comes to that part.

Fullstack, with static sites

Flightcontrol enables fullstack workflows with everything from static sites to servers and database. Porter only serves backend use cases with servers and databases.

This also means you get fullstack preview environments, so you can test your entire system end to end with each pull request.

We also support MySQL and MariaDB databases, which Porter does not.

More affordable

Superior security

Faster app performance

Advanced workflows





You're moments away from launch

Or continue exploring and learn more about the platform