Wasabi

Wasabi — Flat-rate hot storage with no egress or API fees, bounded by a fair-use cap. Wasabi sells one storage class at one price with no egress and no request charges, which is genuinely simple until you read the acceptable-use policy: monthly downloads above roughly your stored volume fall outside the terms. A 90-day minimum retention period and a 4 KB minimum billable object size make it a poor fit for churny or small-object workloads. It does run a Sydney region, which most of the cheap tier does not. Built by Wasabi Technologies. Founded 2015.

We track it in 1 comparison — S3-compatible storage — so every claim below is a cell in a table you can open and check rather than an impression. Across those rosters it sits against 11 other tools, and what follows is where it visibly separates from them.

Where it wins.

• Egress $/TB — $0 /TB, tied for best across 4 of 11 tools.
• S3 API coverage — 90 %, 3rd of 12.
• TTFB from Sydney — 30 ms, 4th of 10.

Each of those is ranked against the whole roster on its category page, not against a hand-picked subset, so a first place here means first of everything we list.

Where it gives ground.

• Min retention — 129600 min, the weakest of the 12 here. Cloudflare R2 records 0 ms.
• Min billed object — 4 KB, the weakest of the 12 here. Cloudflare R2 records 0 B.
• Replication model — single-az, 8th of 12. Tigris records multi-region.

None of these disqualify it on their own. They are the fields to check against your own requirements before you commit, because they are the ones where a competitor genuinely does better.

Provenance. 25 of 28 tracked fields carry a value for Wasabi, and 6 of those cite a document you can open. Last verified 2026-07-23. Every figure keeps its own provenance — measured by us, claimed by the vendor, inferred, or community-reported — and we would rather print a dash than a guess.

Its nearest neighbour in our data is AWS S3. Wasabi is ahead on Egress $/TB ($0 /TB against $90 /TB) and Class A $/M ops ($0 /M ops against $5 /M ops). AWS S3 takes Min retention (0 ms against 129600 min) and Event notifications (Yes against No). That pattern repeats across the rest of the roster — see Wasabi alternatives for the other rivals, each compared the same way.

Company

Wasabi Technologies

Founded

2015

Fields we track

25 of 28

Last verified

2026-07-23

Excellent if your read volume is modest and your objects are large and long-lived — the 90-day minimum retention and 4 KB billing floor punish everything else. The egress fair-use cap means Wasabi's 'no egress fees' and R2's are not the same promise, and this page's scenario is exactly where the difference shows.

Egress $/TB

$0 /TB1st of 11

Vendor-claimedverified 2026-07-23source

Min retention

129600 min12th of 12

Vendor-claimedverified 2026-07-23source

S3 API coverage

90 %3rd of 12

Inferred

TTFB from Sydney

30 ms4th of 10

Inferred

Egress cap (x stored)

1 x stored2nd of 2

Inferredverified 2026-07-23

Min billed object

4 KB12th of 12

Inferredverified 2026-07-23

Storage $/TB/mo

$6.99 /TB/mo5th of 11

Vendor-claimedverified 2026-07-23source

Sydney region

●Yes1st of 11

Inferredverified 2026-07-23

Wasabi is the right call in these situations, each one drawn from a field we actually record:

• Media archives and backup vaults with predictable, low read volume.
• Australian workloads that need in-country storage at a flat rate.
• Teams that want AWS-shaped IAM policies without the AWS bill.
• Egress $/TB is your binding constraint. Wasabi records $0 /TB, the best figure in the S3-compatible storage roster. We define that field as marginal list price to transfer one terabyte (1,000 GB) out to the public internet, beyond any free allowance, excluding intra-provider and CDN origin-fetch transfer.
• S3 API coverage is your binding constraint. Wasabi records 90 %, 3rd of 12 in the S3-compatible storage roster.
• TTFB from Sydney is your binding constraint. Wasabi records 30 ms, 4th of 10 in the S3-compatible storage roster.

Reach for something else when any of the following is a requirement rather than a nice-to-have:

• Min retention. Wasabi records 129600 min, the weakest of the 12 tools in the S3-compatible storage roster. Cloudflare R2 records 0 ms on the same field. If that is a hard requirement rather than a preference, start elsewhere.
• Min billed object. Wasabi records 4 KB, the weakest of the 12 tools in the S3-compatible storage roster. Cloudflare R2 records 0 B on the same field. If that is a hard requirement rather than a preference, start elsewhere.
• Replication model. Wasabi records single-az, 8th of 12 in the S3-compatible storage roster. Tigris records multi-region on the same field. If that is a hard requirement rather than a preference, start elsewhere.

We publish this block because a comparison that only lists what a tool is good at is marketing. Every figure above sits on the same page as its source, and the field definitions are on the category tables if you want to check how we measured them.

What we don't know. 3 of the 28 fields we track for Wasabi are still blank: True cost /mo (USD), True cost /mo (AUD) and True cost from Sydney (AUD). Those render as dashes rather than as zeroes or assumptions, because an empty cell and a bad cell are not the same thing and only one of them is honest. If you know any of these figures and can point at a document, tell us.