Head to head · Agents & Automation · v2026.Q3 · verified 2026-08-06

Temporal vs Inngest: the honest comparison

The short answer

Edition v2026.Q3 · pricing and status verified 2026-08-06.

Choose Temporal for production agent fleets and money-touching workflows that must survive crashes, redeploys, and week-long human-in-the-loop pauses. Choose Inngest for typeScript/serverless product teams who want durable step functions, events, and per-tenant flow control (debounce, throttle, concurrency) with zero infrastructure.

On the elems table, Temporal holds seat #1 of the Orchestration element and Inngest holds #2 — this is the closest call in the category, and the honest answer depends on which trade-off you can live with.

The case for each

  1. 1TemporalTemporal Technologies

    Self-host free (MIT) · Cloud: Essentials from $100/mo (1M actions) · Business from $500/mo · Enterprise custom · $1,000 trial credits

    Best for Production agent fleets and money-touching workflows that must survive crashes, redeploys, and week-long human-in-the-loop pauses.

    Watch The steepest learning curve in the category — deterministic-workflow constraints, workers, task queues — and self-hosting the server is a real ops job. Per-action Cloud pricing gets chatty-agent expensive; every tool call and retry is an action.

    $300M Series D at $5B post, a16z lead; revenue +380% YoY (Feb 17, 2026) [src] · 9.1T lifetime Cloud actions, 1.86T from AI-native companies; OpenAI, Block, ADP in production (Feb 2026) [src]
  2. 2InngestInngest

    Hobby free (50k executions/mo) · Pro from $99/mo (1M executions, 100 concurrency) · Enterprise custom

    Best for TypeScript/serverless product teams who want durable step functions, events, and per-tenant flow control (debounce, throttle, concurrency) with zero infrastructure.

    Watch The server is SSPL with delayed Apache-2.0 — practically, you're buying the cloud. Execution-count pricing punishes chatty agents, and the eval push moves it onto Ev-element turf it hasn't proven yet.

    $21M Series A led by Altimeter, with a16z (Sep 16, 2025) [src] · Agent Evals, Sessions, run scoring shipped Jun 2026; AgentKit multi-agent networks with MCP tooling [src]

Temporal vs Inngest: side by side

Edition v2026.Q3 · verified 2026-08-06.

Temporal vs Inngest — verified 2026-08-06.
TemporalInngest
Execution modelServer + workers (you run code)Event-driven steps on your compute
LicenseMIT serverSSPL server, Apache SDKs
SDK languagesGo · Java · TS · Py · .NET · PHP · RubyTS · Py · Go · Kotlin/Java
Cloud entry$100/mo (1M actions)$99/mo (1M execs)
Self-hostYes (real ops job)Dev server yes; prod = cloud
Agent toolingOpenAI Agents SDK GA · AgentKit-style samplesAgentKit · Agent Evals · flow control
Proof at scaleOpenAI, Block; 9.1T actionsSoundCloud; Series A stage

What each side won't tell you

Temporal: The steepest learning curve in the category — deterministic-workflow constraints, workers, task queues — and self-hosting the server is a real ops job. Per-action Cloud pricing gets chatty-agent expensive; every tool call and retry is an action.

Inngest: The server is SSPL with delayed Apache-2.0 — practically, you're buying the cloud. Execution-count pricing punishes chatty agents, and the eval push moves it onto Ev-element turf it hasn't proven yet.

If it's neither

The rest of the top five: Trigger.dev (typescript agents, managed compute) · Hatchet (postgres tasks, mit oss) · Restate (single-binary durable runtime). The complete field — 24 more tools including the graveyard — is on the element page.

This analysis is drawn from the Orchestration element dossier — the ranked top 5, the comparison matrix, and the complete field of 24 more tools live there, with every source. Data: or.json (CC BY 4.0).

Every claim above is dated and sourced from the elems dossiers — 1,421 tools tracked across 58 categories, verified 2026-08-06, including the 276 we found dead, renamed, acquired, or sunsetting. Rankings are editorial, never paid — the charter.

Build your stack in 5 questions →