This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Roman
Next.js and Vercel often feel inseparable - the framework and the platform evolving side by side. For many developers, deploying to Vercel is the default: zero-config, instant CI/CD, and all the modern features baked in.
Let’s be honest - at some point Next.js started to feel like a Vercel-first framework, rather than a truly standalone one.
But at the end of the day, we’re still able to run Next.js outside of Vercel in standalone mode, and deploy it anywhere Node.js is supported - AWS, GCP, Azure, or even bare metal. This remains a solid option for many companies that need to self-host for cost, compliance, security, or control reasons.
So what do we actually gain, and what do we lose, when self-host Next.js instead of running it on Vercel?
Why Even Consider Self-Hosting?
If Vercel works that well (and it is!), why move away then?
The answer usually comes down to scale, compliance, and control:
- Cost predictability at scale → Vercel’s usage-based pricing can spike unpredictably
- Custom caching → use Redis, S3, DynamoDB, or hybrid cache strategies
- Enterprise compliance → data residency or vendor restrictions may block SaaS usage
- Deep cloud integration and security → private VPC databases, IAM roles, WAF, custom logging
- Infrastructure control → tune cold starts, multi-region routing, autoscaling rules
Yes, Vercel makes it easy to scale at globe from start, but it still does not give you that control over you infrastructure, regions to deploy, controlling CDN and etc.
Cost: The Short-Run vs Long-Run Trade-Off
In the short run → Vercel is often cheaper
- No DevOps team required
- No need to build CI/CD, release processes, or monitoring pipelines
- Pay-as-you-go pricing works well for unpredictable workloads
In the short run → Self-hosting is often more expensive
- You must build deployment pipelines (GitHub Actions, Terraform, Kubernetes)
- You need an infra/DevOps team to manage scaling, observability, and rollbacks
- Upfront complexity often eats away the “theoretical” savings
In the long run → Self-hosting usually wins
- Reserved capacity (EC2, ECS, K8s, or Lambda Savings Plans) drives down per-request costs
- Costs become predictable and controllable - important for enterprises running steady high-traffic workloads
- You fully control networking and its cost
💡 Think of it like this:
- Vercel = renting a fully furnished apartment. Easy to move in, but rent grows with usage.
- Self-hosting = buying a house. Expensive up front, but you own and optimize every detail long-term.
What You Gain with Self-Hosting
1. Full Control Over Infrastructure
On Vercel you get a black box. On your own infra, you decide:
- Where builds run (AWS Lambda, ECS, Kubernetes, Cloud Run)
- How caching works (Redis, S3, DynamoDB)
- Which CDN powers your edge (CloudFront, Fastly, Cloudflare)
- Deployment and rollback strategies
- Regions to deploy
…and many other things.
👉 I’ve covered advanced caching strategies for self-hosted Next.js (including custom cache handlers) in a separate article - check that out if you want to go deeper.
2. Integration with Your Cloud Stack
Running Next.js inside AWS/GCP makes it seamless to:
- Connect directly to private VPC databases
- Use IAM roles instead of API keys
- Plug into CloudWatch / Prometheus / Datadog
- Deploy multi-region replicas behind Route53 or GCP Load Balancing
💡 With Vercel, you often need a separate backend service just to handle private resources.
3. Potentially Lower Costs at Scale
At high scale, self-hosting can be 3–5x cheaper:
- Vercel Enterprise: usage-based, priced per request + bandwidth.
- AWS Lambda: ~$0.20 per million requests + execution time., when Vercel costs ~$.60 per million requests.
- EC2/K8s: fixed monthly cost, can be reduced further with reserved instances.
📊 Example:
50M requests/month
- On Vercel: ~$1,000+
- On AWS Lambda: $250–$400
Note: these numbers are rough estimates. Actual costs vary depending on execution time, region, and instance size.
But remember: these savings only show up once you’ve absorbed the DevOps overhead. That’s why self-hosting usually only pays off in the long run, and mostly when you hit specific requirements - like sustained high load or global infrastructure.
What You Lose with Self-Hosting
1. Zero-Config DX
Vercel: git push → deploy. And that’s it, no complex CI/CD, no scripts, no cdk or terraform.
Self-host: you own CI/CD, cache warming, rollbacks, infra debugging - and you’ll need a DevOps team to manage it.
2. Built-In Features
Vercel gives you out of the box:
- Image optimization
- Edge middleware at global scale
- Analytics dashboards
- Global Infrastructure (it keeps growing)
- Full integration with git
- Easy to create different environments (dev, stage, prod, etc.) + preview envs
- Logging
- All Next.js features are integrated immediately into vercel (like redirects, rewrites, etc.)
On self-host you need to implement or configure all of this yourself, and some features aren’t trivial to replicate quickly.
3. Scaling Complexity
Vercel makes scaling invisible.
Self-hosting means handling:
- Cold starts on Lambda / Cloud Functions
- Instances autoscaling
- Global replication and routing
When to Choose Vercel vs Self-Hosting
Stay on Vercel if:
- You want speed of iteration and zero DevOps overhead
- Your workloads are mostly frontend + rendering, not heavy API/data crunching
- You’re okay with usage-based pricing
- Even at the enterprise level (e-commerce, SaaS, marketing) - Vercel is a solid choice, as long as:
- You monitor costs carefully
- You offload heavy compute/data work to dedicated backend services
Go self-hosted if:
- You need predictable infra costs
- Your app requires custom caching or storage strategies
- Compliance or data residency block SaaS usage
- You already have a DevOps team and cloud expertise
- Your infrastructure already lives in a cloud provider, and you want your Next.js app to integrate tightly into that ecosystem
Final Thoughts
Vercel is unbeatable for time-to-market and simplicity, and it keeps growing, adding new features and trying to offer better pricing, so it’s definitely a solid choice for projects of any size.
But if you need control, compliance, or predictable cost at scale, self-hosting gives you the freedom to optimize every layer - from caching to scaling to infra costs.
The real takeaway:
- Vercel is great for building products fast
- Self-hosting is great for running them at scale on your own terms
This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Roman
Roman | Sciencx (2025-08-21T09:07:02+00:00) Self-Hosting Next.js: What You Gain (and Lose) vs Vercel. Retrieved from https://www.scien.cx/2025/08/21/self-hosting-next-js-what-you-gain-and-lose-vs-vercel/
Please log in to upload a file.
There are no updates yet.
Click the Upload button above to add an update.