Answers that name Cloudflare

If you're a solo developer deploying multiple client sites, I'd optimize for "I never have to SSH into a server" rather than raw infrastructure flexibility.

My pick: Cloudflare

For mostly marketing sites, brochure sites, landing pages, blogs, and lightweight web apps, I'd choose cloudflare.com.

Why:

• Very low maintenance — Git-based deploys, CDN, SSL, DNS, caching, and serverless functions are all managed.
• Excellent economics for client sites — static asset requests are free and unlimited; Workers' paid plan starts at $5/month with 10 million requests included. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs
• Easy scaling — you don't provision servers or worry about traffic spikes.
• Great for client DNS — Cloudflare can handle DNS, SSL, CDN, WAF/DDoS protection, and hosting in one ecosystem. Its free plan includes CDN, SSL, and unmetered DDoS protection. Cloudflare
• Cloudflare is now steering new projects toward Workers rather than Pages, while Workers supports the same general deployment model and adds more capabilities. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

When I'd choose Vercel instead

If you're primarily building Next.js, I'd probably choose vercel.com.

It's the smoother "connect GitHub → deploy → done" experience, particularly when you're using Next.js-specific functionality. The tradeoff is that Vercel tends to become less attractive as a standardized hosting platform for lots of small client sites because of pricing and usage considerations. StackFYI

How I'd rank them for you

The stack I'd use

For a typical client website, I'd aim for:

GitHub → Cloudflare → client domain

with:

• Cloudflare Workers/Pages — hosting
• Cloudflare DNS — domain/DNS
• Cloudflare SSL — HTTPS
• GitHub — source/deployment
• Cloudflare Workers — APIs/serverless functionality when needed
• Managed database only when the project actually needs one

That gives you a repeatable deployment template. Once you've done the first few, adding another client site becomes mostly configuration rather than infrastructure work.

One caveat: if your sites are WordPress/PHP, ecommerce applications, or apps requiring a persistent Node/Python process, I'd make a different recommendation. For those, the "best" hosting architecture changes considerably.

For a typical client website, I'd aim for:

GitHub → Cloudflare → client domain

with:

For a solo developer deploying lots of client sites, I’d optimize for:

• Git-based deployments
• Automatic SSL/CDN
• Preview deployments
• Easy custom domains
• Minimal server management
• Predictable billing
• Easy handoff if a client eventually wants their own account

My pick: Cloudflare Pages + Workers

cloudflare.com is probably the best overall setup for a freelance/agency-style workflow in 2026.

Cloudflare Pages gives you static hosting with free/unlimited static-asset requests, while Pages Functions run on Workers. The paid Workers plan starts at $5/month per account, with no additional charge for bandwidth/egress. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

For typical client sites—marketing sites, brochure sites, blogs, documentation, Astro/React/Vite sites—that's an excellent combination.

How I'd rank them

The important exception: Next.js

If most of your client work is Next.js, I'd choose vercel.com instead.

Vercel has the smoothest Next.js deployment experience and handles things like SSR, ISR, Server Components, previews, and framework-specific infrastructure with very little configuration.

But don't use Vercel's free Hobby plan for client work: Vercel's current terms explicitly restrict Hobby to personal, non-commercial use. Vercel

So for commercial client sites, budget for the appropriate Vercel plan.

What I'd actually do as a solo developer

I'd use this stack:

Static/Astro/Vite/React sites
→ Cloudflare Pages
→ Cloudflare DNS
→ GitHub
→ automatic deploy on push

Next.js sites
→ Vercel
→ GitHub
→ automatic deploy on push

Sites needing a database/auth/backend
→ Keep the frontend on Cloudflare/Vercel
→ Use Supabase/Neon/etc. for the backend rather than maintaining a VPS

That gives you a workflow where you rarely need to SSH into a server, patch an OS, configure Nginx, renew certificates, or worry about individual machines.

One agency-specific tip

Don't put all your clients under your personal account if you can avoid it. Ideally, each client owns their Cloudflare/Vercel account and you get collaborator access. That makes billing, ownership, and eventual handoff dramatically cleaner.

Bottom line: If you told me "I build 20–50 relatively simple client websites and want hosting to be boring," I'd start with Cloudflare Pages. If you told me "Most of these are Next.js apps," I'd use Vercel instead.

For a hobbyist blog that mixes static content (articles, images, CSS/JS) with some dynamic features (comments, contact forms, APIs, personalized pages), I’d prioritize platforms that let you start nearly free and add compute only when needed.

My top picks

1. Cloudflare Pages + Workers — best overall for a hobby blog

Cloudflare's static assets are free and unlimited, while dynamic requests can run through Workers. The free Workers tier currently includes 100,000 requests/day; the paid tier starts at $5/month and includes 10 million requests/month. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

A nice architecture is:

Git repository → Cloudflare Pages → static blog

plus

Pages → Worker → database/API

This is particularly attractive if most of your blog is static and only things such as comments, search, contact forms, or an API need compute.

developers.cloudflare.com

2. Render — easiest if you want a traditional backend

Render is probably the friendliest choice if you don't want to learn serverless concepts. You can deploy a static site for free and add a conventional Node.js, Python, Django, FastAPI, Rails, etc. web service when you need server-side code. Render Render

It also has free web services suitable for hobby projects, although free services have limitations and spin down after 15 minutes of inactivity. Render Render

render.com

3. Vercel — excellent if you're using Next.js

If your blog is built with Next.js, Vercel is an especially smooth experience: Git-based deployments, server-side rendering, API routes/functions, and static generation all fit naturally into the platform.

What I'd choose

For a new hobbyist blogger, I'd go:

• Mostly static blog + a few dynamic features: Cloudflare Pages + Workers
• Static frontend + Python/Node backend: Render
• Next.js blog: Vercel
• Want to learn traditional cloud infrastructure: DigitalOcean
• Want to learn the broader cloud ecosystem: AWS

I wouldn't start with a virtual machine unless you specifically want the learning experience. A managed platform removes OS updates, reverse proxies, TLS configuration, deployment scripts, and a lot of operational work—things that aren't particularly useful when your primary goal is blogging.

For your particular use case, Cloudflare is probably the cheapest, while Render is probably the easiest to understand.

A nice architecture is:

Git repository → Cloudflare Pages → static blog

plus

Pages → Worker → database/API

This is particularly attractive if most of your blog is static and only things such as comments, search, contact forms, or an API need compute.

developers.cloudflare.com

2. Render — easiest if you want a traditional backend

Render is probably the friendliest choice if you don't want to learn serverless concepts. You can deploy a static site for free and add a conventional Node.js, Python, Django, FastAPI, Rails, etc. web service when you need server-side code. render.com render.com

It also has free web services suitable for hobby projects, although free services have limitations and spin down after 15 minutes of inactivity. render.com render.com

render.com

3. Vercel — excellent if you're using Next.js

For a hobbyist blog that mixes static content (articles, images, pages) with dynamic features (comments, search, newsletters, small APIs, dashboards, etc.), the most cost-effective choice is usually not one cloud service for everything. A split architecture often gives the best price and simplicity:

• Static site hosting → cheap/free CDN-backed hosting
• Dynamic features → small serverless functions or a tiny app server
• Database/storage → managed low-cost services

Here are good beginner-friendly options:

Amazon Web Services, Inc. CloudZero## My recommendations by blogging style

1. Mostly articles + occasional interactive features (best value)

Cloudflare Pages + Workers

Example:

• Markdown posts → static generator (Astro, Hugo, Eleventy)
• Images → object storage
• Comments/contact forms → Workers Functions
• Simple database → D1

This can often run at very low cost for a personal blog because static assets are served from a CDN. Gautam Khorana bootstrap.build

2. You want the easiest beginner experience

Vercel or Netlify

Good if you want:

• push code → site deploys automatically
• preview links for changes
• minimal server administration

This is especially comfortable with frameworks like Next.js. Gautam Khorana

3. You want to learn “real servers”

Amazon Lightsail or DigitalOcean

Good if your goal is learning:

• Linux
• SSH
• Nginx
• Docker
• databases
• backups

Lightsail is designed as a simpler AWS experience with bundled resources and predictable pricing. Amazon Web Services, Inc. CloudZero

4. You want WordPress or a CMS

Consider:

• Lightsail WordPress
• Managed WordPress hosting
• A small VPS

A CMS is convenient, but a static-first approach usually has fewer maintenance tasks.

A practical hobbyist stack

A nice balance of cost, learning, and flexibility:

• Frontend/blog: Astro or Hugo
• Hosting: Cloudflare Pages
• Dynamic functions: Cloudflare Workers
• Database: Cloudflare D1 or a small managed PostgreSQL database
• Images/files: Cloudflare R2 or similar object storage
• Source control: GitHub

Michele Bologna Gautam KhoranaFor most hobby bloggers, I would start with Cloudflare Pages + a static site generator, then add dynamic pieces only when needed. It avoids paying for an always-running server while still leaving room for interactive features. Gautam Khorana

For a small SaaS with a separate web frontend + API backend, I’d prioritize platforms that make Git-based deployments, preview environments, environment management, logs, rollbacks, and CI integration painless.

My shortlist

1. Render — my default recommendation

For your exact architecture, Render is probably the sweet spot.

You can have:

• Frontend as a static site or web service
• API as a web service
• Background workers
• Cron jobs
• Managed Postgres
• Redis-compatible storage
• Docker services

all within the same platform. Render supports GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket deployments and can automatically deploy on pushes or merges. It can also wait for your CI checks to pass before deploying. Render Render

Its PR preview environments are particularly useful for SaaS development: each pull request can get its own deployed instance. Render

You can also keep GitHub Actions as your primary CI system and use Render purely as CD, including triggering deployments from Actions. Render

render.com

I'd choose Render if: you want to ship quickly without feeling boxed into a frontend-centric platform.

2. Vercel — best frontend experience

If your frontend is Next.js, Vercel is hard to beat.

Its Git workflow is extremely polished:

git push → build → preview → merge → production

Every PR can receive a unique preview URL, and Vercel supports using external CI such as GitHub Actions when you want more control. Vercel

The catch is that I'd generally not make Vercel the primary home for a conventional API backend if your API has long-running processes, workers, WebSockets, unusual networking requirements, or substantial background processing.

A very good architecture is:

Vercel → frontend
Render/Railway → API + workers + database

That gives you excellent frontend DX without forcing your backend into the frontend platform's execution model.

vercel.com

3. Railway — best "I just want this deployed" experience

Railway is arguably the most pleasant option if you're a small team and want infrastructure to stay out of your way.

It's particularly attractive for:

• API
• Postgres
• Redis
• workers
• cron jobs
• Docker containers
• small internal services

The developer experience is excellent, especially when you're spinning up several interconnected services. Current comparisons also tend to put Railway toward the top for developer experience, while Render is more of the conventional managed-PaaS choice. SpeedTestHQ Railway Blog

railway.com

I'd pick Railway over Render if your primary criterion is "I want to go from repo to running infrastructure with as little ceremony as possible."

4. Fly.io — excellent if you want Docker + infrastructure control

Fly.io is compelling if you expect to care about:

• geographic placement
• low latency
• Docker
• private networking
• multiple regions
• running conventional server processes

It's more infrastructure-oriented than Render/Railway, though, so I'd expect to spend somewhat more time understanding deployment and operational details.

fly.io

5. AWS — best when "small SaaS" eventually becomes "serious infrastructure"

AWS has by far the deepest CI/CD and infrastructure ecosystem, but that's also its downside.

You can build almost anything with:

• GitHub Actions
• ECS/Fargate
• Lambda
• RDS
• ElastiCache
• CloudFront
• S3
• ECR
• CodeBuild/CodePipeline
• Terraform/OpenTofu

But you're assembling a platform rather than receiving one.

For a 2–5 person SaaS team, I'd usually avoid starting with raw AWS unless you already have AWS expertise or have requirements that justify it.

What I'd actually deploy

For a typical SaaS in 2026, I'd seriously consider:

                    GitHub
                       │
              ┌────────┴────────┐
              │                 │
         GitHub Actions      Pull Request
              │                 │
              ▼                 ▼
         CI: lint/test      Preview deploy
              │
              ▼
       ┌───────────────┐
       │               │
       ▼               ▼
    Vercel           Render
   Frontend        API / Worker
                       │
                 ┌─────┴─────┐
                 ▼           ▼
              Postgres     Redis

Vercel + Render is probably my #1 combination for a small SaaS where the frontend is modern React/Next.js.

If you want one provider instead, I'd choose Render.

If you want the absolute simplest developer workflow, I'd choose Railway.

If you're Next.js-heavy and the backend is relatively simple, I'd choose Vercel.

If you tell me your stack (e.g. Next.js + FastAPI + Postgres, React + Node/Express, etc.) and roughly your expected traffic, I can narrow this down to a specific architecture and CI/CD setup.

For a freelancer serving local businesses, I’d optimize for three things: low monthly cost, minimal server administration, and easy client handoff. You usually don’t need AWS/Azure-level complexity.

My shortlist

1. DigitalOcean — my default recommendation

DigitalOcean

For freelancing, DigitalOcean is probably the best middle ground between cheap and professional.

Their Droplets currently start at $4/month, with a 1 GB/1 vCPU/25 GB configuration at $6/month, and DigitalOcean advertises a 99.99% uptime SLA. www.digitalocean.com

The particularly attractive option is App Platform if you don't want to administer Linux servers. It's a fully managed platform starting at $0. www.digitalocean.com

I'd use it for:

• Small business websites
• WordPress
• Laravel/PHP
• Node.js apps
• Dockerized applications
• Small databases/APIs
• Hosting several low-traffic client projects

A $6–12/month VPS can be remarkably capable for a typical local-business website.

2. Cloudflare Pages — best for brochure/marketing sites

Cloudflare

If you're building sites that are primarily HTML/CSS/JS, Astro, Next.js static exports, Hugo, etc., I'd seriously consider Cloudflare Pages.

Static asset requests are free and unlimited on Pages, while Functions use the Workers pricing model. developers.cloudflare.com

That makes it excellent for:

• Dentists
• Contractors
• Restaurants
• Law firms
• Realtors
• Salons
• Local service businesses
• Any site that doesn't need a traditional backend

You can essentially make hosting cost $0 for many clients while still giving them CDN, SSL, DNS, and excellent global performance.

3. Cloudways — easiest for WordPress clients

Cloudways

If most of your clients want WordPress, I'd lean toward a managed service rather than maintaining Linux servers yourself.

DigitalOcean currently lists Cloudways Managed Hosting starting at $11/month, with WordPress/PHP optimization, Git, staging, and other management features. www.digitalocean.com

The extra cost is worthwhile if it saves you from:

• Server updates
• PHP configuration
• Security maintenance
• Backups
• Troubleshooting
• WordPress performance issues

4. Hetzner — excellent if you want maximum margin

Hetzner

Hetzner is worth considering if you're comfortable administering Linux and want to put many small client sites on inexpensive infrastructure.

The tradeoff is that you're getting closer to "I'm the sysadmin" territory. For a freelancer whose time is worth more than a few dollars per month, DigitalOcean's simpler ecosystem can be worth the premium.

5. Render — great for developer-built apps

Render

For Node, Python, Rails, Docker, APIs, and similar applications, Render is attractive because deployment and infrastructure management are considerably simpler than running your own VPS.

I'd choose it over a VPS when deployment simplicity matters more than squeezing every dollar out of hosting.

What I'd actually do as a freelancer

I'd use a three-tier hosting strategy:

Tier 1 — $0 hosting:
Cloudflare Pages for static marketing sites.

Tier 2 — ~$6–25/mo:
DigitalOcean for WordPress, PHP, Docker, and small applications.

Tier 3 — ~$11+/mo per environment:
Cloudways when the client wants WordPress but you don't want to be responsible for server administration.

The key freelancer trick is not to give every client their own $50–100/month cloud infrastructure. A lot of local-business sites have extremely modest resource requirements.

For example, you could have a small DigitalOcean server hosting several low-traffic sites, while isolating them appropriately with containers/reverse proxies and keeping backups and monitoring separate. Your infrastructure bill can stay low while you charge clients for hosting/maintenance as a recurring service.

One important caveat: don't treat cheap hosting as cheap responsibility. For client sites, I'd budget for automated backups, uptime monitoring, SSL, DNS management, security updates, and a documented recovery procedure.

If you tell me whether you're mainly building WordPress sites, static sites, or custom apps, I can give you a specific freelancer-friendly stack (hosting + DNS + backups + deployment + monitoring) that could support, say, 10–50 local-business clients for a relatively small monthly infrastructure bill.

For an agency responsible for securing multiple client websites, I’d prioritize cloud providers that combine strong infrastructure security with centralized identity, WAF/DDoS protection, vulnerability detection, logging, and security posture management.

My top choices

*Cloudflare is an edge/security platform rather than a direct equivalent to AWS/Azure/GCP for hosting arbitrary infrastructure.

1. AWS — probably the best all-around choice

AWS has an exceptionally broad security ecosystem: IAM/IAM Identity Center, WAF, Shield, GuardDuty, Inspector, Macie, CloudTrail, Security Hub, Firewall Manager, and more. GuardDuty continuously monitors accounts, workloads, and data for malicious activity and anomalous behavior. AWS Documentation Amazon Web Services, Inc.

For an agency, one particularly useful feature is centralized governance across multiple client environments. AWS Organizations can enforce policies across accounts, while Firewall Manager can centrally manage WAF, Shield, security groups, and other protections. AWS Documentation

I'd choose AWS if: you expect to manage dozens of client sites, need strong isolation between clients, or have clients with compliance/security requirements.

2. Azure — excellent for enterprise clients

Azure has a similarly strong security stack. Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides continuous security assessment, vulnerability recommendations, and threat detection. Azure also offers Entra ID, Azure Firewall, Web Application Firewall, DDoS protection, Key Vault, and Sentinel for broader security operations. Microsoft Learn Microsoft Learn

Its WAF can protect against common web attacks such as SQL injection, XSS, and other OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities. Microsoft Learn

I'd choose Azure if: your clients are already heavily invested in Microsoft 365, Entra ID, Windows, or Microsoft enterprise infrastructure.

3. Google Cloud — particularly attractive for web applications

Google Cloud has very strong native security through IAM, Cloud Armor, Security Command Center, encryption, logging, and security analytics. Cloud Armor specifically protects applications against DDoS and web attacks. Google Cloud

Security Command Center provides centralized asset visibility, threat detection, security posture management, and compliance capabilities. Its current offerings range from a no-cost Standard tier to Premium and Enterprise capabilities. Google Cloud Google Cloud

I'd choose GCP if: your agency primarily builds modern web applications, containerized workloads, or Google-centric infrastructure.

4. Cloudflare — I would strongly consider it in front of your hosting

For a security-focused web agency, Cloudflare is worth treating differently from the three hyperscalers. You can host the site elsewhere while putting Cloudflare in front of it for WAF, DDoS mitigation, bot protection, TLS, DNS security, and edge controls.

That architecture is often more compelling than relying solely on the hosting provider's security:

Visitor → Cloudflare → WAF/DDoS/bot controls → AWS/Azure/GCP → application

This gives your agency a consistent security layer even when different clients use different underlying hosting.

What I'd recommend for an agency

If you're building a standardized service offering, I'd lean toward:

AWS + Cloudflare for the broadest, most flexible setup.

For each client, establish:

• Separate cloud accounts/projects for isolation
• MFA and least-privilege IAM
• Cloudflare WAF + DDoS protection
• TLS everywhere
• Automated backups with protected/off-site copies
• Centralized logging and audit trails
• Vulnerability scanning
• Continuous security posture monitoring
• Automated patching where possible
• Secrets stored in a managed secrets service rather than configuration files
• Infrastructure-as-code so every client's security baseline is reproducible
• Alerts for suspicious logins, configuration changes, exposed resources, and malware

The important distinction is that "secure cloud provider" doesn't automatically mean "secure client site." AWS, Azure, and GCP all use a shared-responsibility model—the agency still has to configure identity, networking, applications, storage, patching, and access correctly. AWS explicitly emphasizes this distinction in its security documentation. AWS Documentation

If you tell me roughly how many client sites you expect to manage (e.g. 10, 50, 500) and whether they're WordPress/PHP, Node/Python apps, or mostly static sites, I can recommend a specific agency architecture and security stack.

AWS has an exceptionally broad security ecosystem: IAM/IAM Identity Center, WAF, Shield, GuardDuty, Inspector, Macie, CloudTrail, Security Hub, Firewall Manager, and more. GuardDuty continuously monitors accounts, workloads, and data for malicious activity and anomalous behavior. AWS Documentation Amazon Web Services, Inc.

For an agency, one particularly useful feature is centralized governance across multiple client environments. AWS Organizations can enforce policies across accounts, while Firewall Manager can centrally manage WAF, Shield, security groups, and other protections. AWS Documentation

I'd choose AWS if: you expect to manage dozens of client sites, need strong isolation between clients, or have clients with compliance/security requirements.

2. Azure — excellent for enterprise clients

Azure has a similarly strong security stack. Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides continuous security assessment, vulnerability recommendations, and threat detection. Azure also offers Entra ID, Azure Firewall, Web Application Firewall, DDoS protection, Key Vault, and Sentinel for broader security operations. Microsoft Learn Microsoft Learn

Its WAF can protect against common web attacks such as SQL injection, XSS, and other OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities. Microsoft Learn

I'd choose Azure if: your clients are already heavily invested in Microsoft 365, Entra ID, Windows, or Microsoft enterprise infrastructure.

3. Google Cloud — particularly attractive for web applications

Google Cloud has very strong native security through IAM, Cloud Armor, Security Command Center, encryption, logging, and security analytics. Cloud Armor specifically protects applications against DDoS and web attacks. Google Cloud

Security Command Center provides centralized asset visibility, threat detection, security posture management, and compliance capabilities. Its current offerings range from a no-cost Standard tier to Premium and Enterprise capabilities. Google Cloud Google Cloud

I'd choose GCP if: your agency primarily builds modern web applications, containerized workloads, or Google-centric infrastructure.

4. Cloudflare — I would strongly consider it in front of your hosting

For a security-focused web agency, Cloudflare is worth treating differently from the three hyperscalers. You can host the site elsewhere while putting Cloudflare in front of it for WAF, DDoS mitigation, bot protection, TLS, DNS security, and edge controls.

That architecture is often more compelling than relying solely on the hosting provider's security:

Visitor → Cloudflare → WAF/DDoS/bot controls → AWS/Azure/GCP → application

This gives your agency a consistent security layer even when different clients use different underlying hosting.

What I'd recommend for an agency

If you're building a standardized service offering, I'd lean toward:

AWS + Cloudflare for the broadest, most flexible setup.

For each client, establish:

• Separate cloud accounts/projects for isolation
• MFA and least-privilege IAM
• Cloudflare WAF + DDoS protection
• TLS everywhere
• Automated backups with protected/off-site copies
• Centralized logging and audit trails
• Vulnerability scanning
• Continuous security posture monitoring
• Automated patching where possible
• Secrets stored in a managed secrets service rather than configuration files
• Infrastructure-as-code so every client's security baseline is reproducible
• Alerts for suspicious logins, configuration changes, exposed resources, and malware

The important distinction is that "secure cloud provider" doesn't automatically mean "secure client site." AWS, Azure, and GCP all use a shared-responsibility model—the agency still has to configure identity, networking, applications, storage, patching, and access correctly. AWS explicitly emphasizes this distinction in its security documentation.

For a PWA aiming at a global audience, I'd shortlist these:

My recommendation

1. Vercel — easiest overall

For a typical modern PWA, this is probably the least-friction option. Every deployment gets a globally distributed CDN automatically, and Vercel currently documents 126+ PoPs across 51 countries. It can cache static content, proxy external backends, and run application code close to users. Vercel Vercel

It's particularly attractive if you're using Next.js, React, or another framework with good Vercel support.

2. Cloudflare — best global-network play

If "global presence" is the priority, I'd seriously consider Cloudflare. Pages deploys onto Cloudflare's global network, while Workers lets you execute backend logic at the edge. Cloudflare's current documentation actually recommends Workers for new projects because it provides a broader application platform than Pages alone. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare

This is especially compelling if your PWA will eventually have globally distributed APIs, authentication, personalization, or edge caching.

3. Netlify — easiest alternative

Netlify is very PWA-friendly: Git-based deployments, global CDN, automatic cache invalidation, previews, and Edge Functions are integrated into the platform. Netlify currently describes its network as having 100+ global edge locations. Netlify Netlify

I'd pick it over Vercel if you're using a framework-agnostic stack and prefer Netlify's workflow.

4. AWS CloudFront — most control

CloudFront is the choice I'd make if you're already building around AWS—especially if your architecture includes S3, API Gateway, Lambda, ECS, or other AWS services. It's extremely capable, but you'll generally do more infrastructure configuration than with Vercel, Cloudflare, or Netlify. AWS Documentation

A good PWA architecture

For most apps, I'd start with:

Browser → CDN/Edge → PWA static assets + edge/serverless API → database

The important thing is not just having a CDN for JS/CSS/images; you want the platform to handle TLS, caching, compression, routing, invalidation, and ideally edge/serverless compute without you having to assemble those pieces yourself.

If you tell me your stack (e.g. React/Vite, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte) and where your database/API lives, I can recommend the best architecture between Vercel vs Cloudflare vs Netlify vs AWS.

For a PWA with a global audience, I’d prioritize platforms where CDN delivery is automatic rather than making you configure a separate CDN/origin stack.

My recommendation

1. Vercel — easiest overall

Vercel automatically puts deployments behind its global CDN, with caching, routing, compression, security, and edge delivery handled for you. Its current network has 126+ PoPs across 51 countries, and it supports running application compute close to users as well. Vercel Vercel

This is particularly attractive if your PWA uses Next.js, since caching and rendering behavior can be integrated with the framework rather than maintained as separate CDN configuration.

2. Cloudflare Pages + Workers — strongest global-network choice

Cloudflare Pages deploys applications directly onto Cloudflare's global network, while Workers gives you edge/serverless compute. Cloudflare currently advertises 335+ locations worldwide for its CDN. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare

I'd pick this if your architecture includes things like:

• Geo-based routing
• Edge authentication
• API endpoints at the edge
• Aggressive caching
• Users distributed across many countries

3. Netlify — excellent PWA workflow

Netlify combines Git-based deployment, a global CDN, instant cache invalidation, and Edge Functions. Its standard Edge platform advertises 70+ global locations and lets you run JavaScript/TypeScript logic at the edge. Netlify Netlify

It's especially nice if your PWA is mostly static/pre-rendered with API calls behind it.

What I'd choose

For a typical global PWA:

Next.js → Vercel
React/Vite/Svelte/etc. → Cloudflare Pages + Workers or Netlify
Already heavily invested in AWS → CloudFront

One architectural point: CDN and edge compute are separate concerns. Your PWA's static shell (index.html, JS, CSS, icons, manifests, etc.) should be aggressively CDN-cached, while authenticated/dynamic API requests may need different caching and edge-routing strategies.

If you tell me your frontend framework + backend/database (e.g. React + Node + Postgres), I can suggest a concrete global architecture and compare expected complexity/cost across Vercel, Cloudflare, and AWS.

For a small team managing lots of separate client websites, I’d prioritize hosting platforms that let you separate projects, assign roles, and avoid giving every developer access to every client.

Best options

My recommendation for a small agency

1. Vercel — easiest overall

If most of your clients' sites are Next.js/React or similar, Vercel is particularly attractive. Its current RBAC system has team-level roles such as Owner, Member, Developer, Billing and Viewer, plus project-level Administrator/Developer/Viewer roles. Enterprise also adds configurable contributors and access groups. Vercel Vercel Vercel

That means you can structure things roughly like:

• Client A → Project A1, A2
• Client B → Project B1
• Developer → access only to assigned projects
• Client → read-only access
• Agency owner → full access
• Billing person → billing permissions without deployment privileges

Vercel also supports SAML SSO, and Enterprise can synchronize/deprovision users through an identity provider. Vercel Vercel

One caveat: fine-grained project roles and access groups are Enterprise features, so check the plan economics if you specifically need strict client-by-client isolation. Vercel

vercel.com

2. AWS — best control, but more administration

AWS is the strongest choice if your clients have complicated requirements or you need hard separation between client environments. AWS Organizations plus IAM Identity Center lets you centrally manage users/groups and assign permission sets across multiple AWS accounts. Amazon Web Services, Inc. AWS Documentation

For an agency, you could give each major client their own AWS account and manage your employees centrally. That's considerably more robust than putting 30 unrelated sites into one account.

The downside is that AWS's flexibility comes with substantially more setup and operational complexity.

aws.amazon.com

3. Cloudflare — excellent companion platform

If you're managing DNS, domains, CDN, WAF and security as well as hosting, Cloudflare is worth considering. It can be particularly useful as the centralized control plane even if the actual applications run elsewhere.

What I'd choose

For a typical 5–15 person web agency managing dozens of client sites:

Vercel + GitHub + Cloudflare is probably the nicest combination.

Use Vercel to isolate deployments/projects, GitHub for source-code permissions, and Cloudflare for DNS/CDN/security. Keep each client's production credentials and environment variables inside their individual project rather than sharing a master account.

If you're running traditional WordPress/PHP sites rather than modern JavaScript applications, I'd make a different recommendation—the ideal hosting stack changes considerably for WordPress agencies.

If you're a small agency/team managing lots of client sites, I'd prioritize hosting platforms that let you separate projects, give teammates different roles, and avoid sharing a master login.

Best options

My picks for a client-site agency

1. Vercel — best overall for modern sites.
Vercel's current RBAC is unusually well suited to an agency: Pro/Enterprise teams have roles such as Owner, Member, Developer, Billing and Viewer, while Enterprise adds project-specific roles and Access Groups. That means you can, for example, give a developer access to only Client A and Client B rather than exposing every client's site. Vercel Vercel Vercel

Its Pro plan also provides free read-only Viewer seats, which is handy for clients or nontechnical teammates who need to inspect deployments without being able to change anything. Vercel

vercel.com

2. Netlify — especially attractive for an agency workflow.
Netlify has explicit team roles, including Owners, Developers and Reviewers. Reviewers can be added without counting toward the team's member billing and can access deployment previews for feedback, which is useful when clients need to review work without getting administrative access. Netlify Docs

docs.netlify.com

3. DigitalOcean — best if you're hosting traditional servers.
DigitalOcean's Teams now have six predefined roles and, importantly, custom roles where you select exactly which permissions someone receives. That is a nice middle ground between simplistic shared hosting and AWS-level complexity. DigitalOcean DigitalOcean DigitalOcean

For example, you could create roles resembling:

• Agency Admin — everything
• Developer — deploy/manage infrastructure but no billing
• Support — read resources and logs
• Billing — billing only
• Client — read-only

docs.digitalocean.com

4. AWS — most powerful, but probably overkill for a small web agency.
AWS becomes compelling if each client needs a genuinely isolated account/environment. AWS Organizations plus IAM Identity Center lets you centrally assign groups and permission sets across multiple AWS accounts. AWS Documentation AWS Documentation AWS Documentation

The downside is operational complexity: it's much easier for a small team to accidentally create an overly complicated IAM setup than with Vercel/Netlify/DigitalOcean.

What I'd choose

For 10–50 relatively independent client websites, I'd probably use:

Vercel or Netlify → one agency team → each client as a separate project/site → individual team accounts → least-privilege roles.

That gives you a clean model:

Agency owner → all sites
Developer → assigned client sites
Designer/content person → preview/read-only where appropriate
Client → their own site/preview only
Billing person → billing without infrastructure access

The big thing I'd avoid is creating a separate cloud account with a shared password for every client. Individual accounts + RBAC make onboarding/offboarding much safer and make it obvious who can touch what.

If you're mainly hosting WordPress/PHP sites rather than Next.js/static sites, the recommendation changes quite a bit; in that case I'd look specifically at managed WordPress hosts with agency/reseller controls.

For a high-traffic blog, I’d prioritize CDN/edge delivery, aggressive caching, image optimization, and minimal server-side work over raw VM performance. For most blogs, the best choice is a managed frontend platform rather than a traditional cloud VM.

My top picks

1. Vercel — easiest high-performance choice

If you're building with Next.js, this would be my default recommendation.

Vercel's CDN sits in front of every deployment, with caching, compression, routing and security handled automatically. Its current network has 126+ PoPs across 51 countries, and its framework-aware CDN can integrate caching with Next.js rather than making you manually configure everything. Vercel Vercel

It's particularly attractive for a blog because you can use:

• Static generation for articles
• ISR for content that changes occasionally
• Automatic image optimization
• CDN caching
• Incremental/on-demand revalidation
• Preview deployments
• Very little infrastructure management

vercel.com

I'd choose Vercel if: you're using Next.js and want the best combination of performance and simplicity.

2. Cloudflare Pages/Workers — excellent for global traffic

Cloudflare is arguably the strongest choice if global edge delivery and bandwidth economics are your biggest concerns.

Cloudflare can serve static HTML, CSS, JavaScript and media directly from its global network, while Workers can put dynamic logic at the edge. Its documentation specifically calls out blogs as a good use case for globally distributed static assets. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

It's especially compelling when your blog is mostly static:

Visitor → Cloudflare edge → cached HTML

rather than:

Visitor → CDN → application server → database → HTML

That can make enormous differences at high traffic.

pages.cloudflare.com

I'd choose Cloudflare if: your content is predominantly static, your audience is worldwide, and you want excellent performance without paying heavily for bandwidth.

3. AWS S3 + CloudFront — best for maximum control

For an extremely large publication or a company already heavily invested in AWS, I'd consider:

S3 → CloudFront → Route 53

For a statically generated blog, this architecture is extremely robust. You don't actually need a traditional application server: generate the blog during deployment and let CloudFront distribute the resulting files.

The downside is that you're responsible for considerably more infrastructure configuration than with Vercel or Cloudflare.

I'd choose AWS if: you need granular control, already use AWS extensively, have infrastructure engineers, or expect the blog to become part of a much larger AWS architecture.

4. Netlify — very good static-blog option

Netlify remains a strong choice for static/Jamstack sites and supports a wide range of frontend frameworks.

It's particularly attractive if you're using something like Astro, Eleventy, Hugo, Gatsby, or another static generator rather than relying heavily on Next.js-specific functionality.

netlify.com

What I'd actually build

For a high-traffic blog, I'd favor this architecture:

                    ┌───────────────┐
                    │   Visitors    │
                    └───────┬───────┘
                            │
                     Global CDN
                            │
              ┌─────────────┴─────────────┐
              │                           │
         Cached HTML                 Cached assets
              │                    CSS/JS/images/fonts
              │
        Static/ISR frontend
              │
        ┌─────┴─────┐
        │           │
       CMS        Search/API

The key is to keep the request path short.

For example, if an article can be pre-rendered, don't make every visitor wait for:

browser → server → database → CMS → render → response

Instead:

browser → nearby CDN → cached HTML

Next.js itself emphasizes that CDN caching and shared caching are important for performance and consistency in multi-instance deployments. Next.js

My recommendation by scenario

• Next.js blog: Vercel
• Astro/static blog: Cloudflare Pages
• Massive global readership: Cloudflare
• Enterprise/AWS ecosystem: AWS + CloudFront
• WordPress blog: Cloudflare in front of a properly optimized origin
• Mostly static articles: Cloudflare Pages or S3 + CloudFront
• Dynamic/personalized content: Vercel or Cloudflare Workers

One important caveat: the hosting provider isn't usually the limiting factor once you're behind a good CDN. A bloated JavaScript bundle, unoptimized images, excessive third-party scripts, uncached API calls, or expensive database queries can overwhelm an otherwise excellent hosting setup. A recent large-scale field analysis similarly found that CDN/hosting infrastructure alone doesn't guarantee good Core Web Vitals when the frontend itself is heavy. PageSpeed Matters

If I were starting your blog today: I'd use Next.js + Vercel for the simplest high-performance setup, or Astro + Cloudflare if the blog is primarily content and doesn't need much dynamic functionality.

It's especially compelling when your blog is mostly static:

Visitor → Cloudflare edge → cached HTML

rather than:

Visitor → CDN → application server → database → HTML

That can make enormous differences at high traffic.

pages.cloudflare.com

I'd choose Cloudflare if: your content is predominantly static, your audience is worldwide, and you want excellent performance without paying heavily for bandwidth.

3. AWS S3 + CloudFront — best for maximum control

For an extremely large publication or a company already heavily invested in AWS, I'd consider:

S3 → CloudFront → Route 53

For a statically generated blog, this architecture is extremely robust. You don't actually need a traditional application server: generate the blog during deployment and let CloudFront distribute the resulting files.

The downside is that you're responsible for considerably more infrastructure configuration than with Vercel or Cloudflare.

I'd choose AWS if: you need granular control, already use AWS extensively, have infrastructure engineers, or expect the blog to become part of a much larger AWS architecture.

4. Netlify — very good static-blog option

Netlify remains a strong choice for static/Jamstack sites and supports a wide range of frontend frameworks.

It's particularly attractive if you're using something like Astro, Eleventy, Hugo, Gatsby, or another static generator rather than relying heavily on Next.js-specific functionality.

netlify.com

What I'd actually build

For a high-traffic blog, I'd favor this architecture:

                    ┌───────────────┐
                    │   Visitors    │
                    └───────┬───────┘
                            │
                     Global CDN
                            │
              ┌─────────────┴─────────────┐
              │                           │
         Cached HTML                 Cached assets
              │                    CSS/JS/images/fonts
              │
        Static/ISR frontend
              │
        ┌─────┴─────┐
        │           │
       CMS        Search/API

The key is to keep the request path short.

For example, if an article can be pre-rendered, don't make every visitor wait for:

browser → server → database → CMS → render → response

Instead:

browser → nearby CDN → cached HTML

Next.js itself emphasizes that CDN caching and shared caching are important for performance and consistency in multi-instance deployments.

My recommendation by scenario

For a high-traffic blog where frontend performance is the priority, I’d shortlist these:

1. Cloudflare Pages — best pure performance/value

Cloudflare Pages is particularly attractive for a blog because static assets are distributed through Cloudflare's global network, with built-in caching and compression. Cloudflare also lets you cache HTML at the edge when appropriate. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

I'd choose it if: your blog is generated with Astro, Hugo, Jekyll, Gatsby, or another static-site generator.

developers.cloudflare.com

2. Vercel — best if you're using Next.js

Vercel is probably the easiest choice for a high-performance Next.js blog. Its CDN caches pages, API responses, and static assets around the world, while ISR lets you combine static-page performance with content that can be regenerated as posts change. Vercel Vercel

For a blog, that's a particularly good architecture: pre-render posts → serve from edge cache → revalidate when content changes.

vercel.com

3. Netlify — great for static + edge functionality

Netlify has a global edge cache and Edge Functions that execute close to visitors. Cached edge responses can bypass function execution entirely, which can be useful if you eventually add personalization, redirects, localization, or other dynamic features. Netlify Docs Netlify Docs

docs.netlify.com

4. AWS CloudFront + S3 — best when you need control

Amazon Web Services gives you much more infrastructure control, but you'll have more configuration to manage. For a straightforward blog, that complexity usually isn't necessary; for a very large publishing platform with custom infrastructure, multiple origins, or sophisticated caching requirements, it becomes much more attractive.

aws.amazon.com

What I'd pick

• Astro/Hugo/static HTML: Cloudflare Pages
• Next.js: Vercel
• Static site + occasional edge/serverless logic: Netlify
• Large enterprise publishing platform / custom architecture: AWS CloudFront + S3

The hosting provider itself is only part of the equation. For a high-traffic blog, I'd prioritize edge caching, static generation, image optimization, compressed assets, long-lived caching for hashed CSS/JS, and minimizing JavaScript. Cloudflare, for example, recommends optimizing cache-hit rates because serving from cache reduces both latency and load on the origin. Cloudflare Docs

If maximum page speed is the goal, my default architecture would be:

CMS → static/ISR build → global CDN → optimized images → browser cache

rather than running WordPress/PHP and a database on every page request.

Vercel is probably the easiest choice for a high-performance Next.js blog. Its CDN caches pages, API responses, and static assets around the world, while ISR lets you combine static-page performance with content that can be regenerated as posts change. Vercel Vercel

For a blog, that's a particularly good architecture: pre-render posts → serve from edge cache → revalidate when content changes.

vercel.com

3. Netlify — great for static + edge functionality

Netlify has a global edge cache and Edge Functions that execute close to visitors. Cached edge responses can bypass function execution entirely, which can be useful if you eventually add personalization, redirects, localization, or other dynamic features. Netlify Docs Netlify Docs

docs.netlify.com

4. AWS CloudFront + S3 — best when you need control

Amazon Web Services gives you much more infrastructure control, but you'll have more configuration to manage. For a straightforward blog, that complexity usually isn't necessary; for a very large publishing platform with custom infrastructure, multiple origins, or sophisticated caching requirements, it becomes much more attractive.

If IaC is a core value for your agency, I’d prioritize providers based on Terraform/Pulumi maturity, provider coverage, state management, CI/CD friendliness, and how easily you can standardize deployments across clients.

My top choices

1. AWS — safest agency default

AWS has exceptionally mature Terraform and Pulumi support. The official Terraform AWS provider covers essentially the entire platform, including EC2, ECS, EKS, Lambda, networking, storage, databases, and IAM. Terraform Registry Terraform Registry

AWS also officially documents Terraform and Pulumi alongside its own CloudFormation/CDK ecosystem. AWS Documentation

This makes AWS particularly good if you want to build reusable agency modules such as:

• client-vpc
• web-app
• ecs-service
• static-site
• production-environment

2. Google Cloud — excellent Terraform-centric choice

Google Cloud has a very mature Terraform provider covering Compute Engine, GKE, Cloud SQL, networking, storage, etc. Terraform Registry Google also provides Infrastructure Manager, which uses Terraform to deploy and manage GCP infrastructure. Its documentation explicitly supports Terraform, CDKTF, and Pulumi. Google Cloud Documentation

I'd consider GCP especially attractive if your agency does Kubernetes, data/AI workloads, or modern application platforms.

3. Azure — excellent if clients are Microsoft-oriented

Azure supports Terraform extremely well, with both the AzureRM and AzAPI providers. Microsoft explicitly positions Terraform as the better choice for multi-cloud/hybrid environments, while Bicep is the Azure-specific option. Microsoft Learn

So for an agency, I'd generally use:

• Terraform → standardized multi-client/multi-cloud platform
• Bicep → Azure-only projects where tight Azure integration matters

What I'd choose for an agency

If you're trying to establish a repeatable infrastructure platform across many clients, my shortlist would be:

Terraform + AWS as the default
Terraform + GCP as the second major platform
Terraform + Azure when the client ecosystem calls for it

Terraform's multi-provider model is particularly valuable for an agency because you can maintain one operational methodology across different clouds rather than retraining your team around each provider's native IaC system. AWS itself recommends Terraform when multi-provider or hybrid infrastructure is a requirement. AWS Documentation

I'd also seriously consider Pulumi if your engineers prefer TypeScript/Python/Go/C# over HCL. Pulumi supports the major clouds and lets you define infrastructure in general-purpose languages; its AWS provider itself is built on the mature Terraform AWS provider. pulumi AWS Documentation

In short: for a digital agency, AWS + Terraform is probably the strongest "boring and scalable" default, while GCP + Terraform and Azure + Terraform give you good expansion paths without changing your IaC operating model.

For a photographer hosting large image galleries, I’d prioritize three things: low storage cost, low/no egress fees, and a CDN so visitors get images from a nearby edge location.

Best options

*Current published rates; actual cost depends heavily on image delivery volume and request counts.

1. Cloudflare R2 — my default recommendation

developers.cloudflare.com

R2 is particularly attractive for photography because internet egress is free. Standard storage is currently $0.015/GB-month, with a 10 GB free tier. It's also S3-compatible and sits on Cloudflare's global network. Cloudflare Docs Cloudflare Docs

For example:

• 1 TB of originals/gallery images → roughly $15/month
• 5 TB → roughly $75/month
• 10 TB → roughly $150/month
• Visitors downloading many terabytes doesn't create a conventional R2 egress bill.

For a gallery website, I'd use R2 for the originals and derivatives, then Cloudflare's edge infrastructure to deliver them.

Best choice if: you want one ecosystem and don't want to worry about bandwidth bills.

2. Backblaze B2 + CDN — excellent for huge archives

backblaze.com

Backblaze B2 is currently $6.95/TB/month, making it substantially cheaper for storage than R2. It also gives you free egress up to 3× your average monthly stored data; egress through supported CDN/compute partners can be unlimited/free. Backblaze

This makes a B2 + Cloudflare or B2 + Bunny CDN architecture particularly compelling for photographers.

For example, with 10 TB:

• B2 storage: about $69.50/month
• CDN delivery: potentially very inexpensive depending on provider/traffic
• Your original RAW/TIFF archive can remain in B2 while web-sized JPEG/AVIF/WebP files are delivered through the CDN.

Backblaze explicitly supports delivering B2 content through Cloudflare CDN. Backblaze

Best choice if: you have tens of terabytes and storage cost matters more than having everything under one provider.

3. Bunny Storage + Bunny CDN — particularly interesting for galleries

bunny.net

Bunny's model is attractive because storage and CDN are tightly integrated. Standard HDD storage starts around $0.01/GB per region, while its CDN lists North America/Europe delivery at $0.01/GB on the standard network. bunny.net bunny.net

That combination can work extremely well for a photography site:

Visitor → Bunny CDN → Bunny Storage

The CDN caches frequently viewed images at the edge, while your underlying storage remains inexpensive.

Bunny also offers edge SSD storage for workloads where you want files replicated closer to users. bunny.net

Best choice if: you want very fast galleries without assembling multiple cloud services.

4. AWS S3 + CloudFront

aws.amazon.com

aws.amazon.com

AWS is the "enterprise" answer. It's extremely capable, but for a photographer who primarily needs "store images and serve galleries quickly," it can be unnecessarily complicated and potentially more expensive.

I'd choose it if you need things like:

• sophisticated access controls
• private client galleries
• signed URLs
• automated image-processing pipelines
• Lambda/serverless processing
• extensive AWS integrations
• sophisticated lifecycle/archival policies

For a straightforward portfolio/gallery site, I'd generally pick R2, B2, or Bunny first.

What I'd actually build

For a photographer with, say, 5–50 TB of photographs, I'd consider these two architectures:

Lowest-cost large archive

Backblaze B2 → Cloudflare CDN → gallery website

Keep:

• RAW files
• TIFFs
• full-resolution JPEGs
• master files

in B2.

Generate web derivatives such as:

• 400–800px thumbnails
• 1600–2500px gallery images
• full-resolution viewing images

and cache those through the CDN.

Simplest all-around setup

Cloudflare R2 → Cloudflare CDN → gallery website

This is the one I'd lean toward if you're building the system yourself. The absence of egress charges is particularly valuable because photography galleries can have surprisingly large bandwidth spikes when a popular gallery gets shared.

One important optimization

Don't serve your 30–60 MB original JPEGs to gallery visitors.

Store the originals in inexpensive object storage, but serve appropriately sized WebP/AVIF/JPEG derivatives. A gallery might display a 2–4 MB image on desktop and a few hundred KB on mobile rather than making every visitor download a 50 MB file.

That can reduce bandwidth by an order of magnitude while making the gallery feel dramatically faster.

My ranking for your use case:

1. 🥇 Cloudflare R2 + Cloudflare CDN — best overall
2. 🥈 Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare/Bunny CDN — best for huge libraries
3. 🥉 Bunny Storage + Bunny CDN — excellent performance/value and very simple
4. AWS S3 + CloudFront — best if you need a sophisticated AWS architecture

If you tell me roughly how many TB you have, monthly visitors/pageviews, and the typical image size, I can calculate the approximate monthly cost for R2 vs B2 vs Bunny vs S3 for your actual photography workload.

For a photographer hosting large galleries with lots of image views/downloads, I’d focus less on raw storage price and more on egress + CDN performance. A cheap storage bucket can become expensive if every gallery view pulls full-resolution files from it.

My top choices

1. Cloudflare R2 — probably my first choice

Cloudflare R2 pricing

R2 Standard is currently $0.015/GB-month, with no Internet egress charge. It also has a 10 GB free tier. developers.cloudflare.com

That is particularly attractive for photography because consider a gallery with:

• 5 TB of originals/previews
• 20 TB/month of image delivery

With traditional object storage, that 20 TB of outbound traffic can be a significant part of your bill. With R2, Internet egress is free.

For an image-gallery website, I'd use:

R2 → Cloudflare CDN/cache → visitor

You can also use R2's S3-compatible API, so you're not locked into a proprietary storage API. developers.cloudflare.com

Best when: your galleries receive substantial traffic and you want predictable bills.

2. Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare CDN — excellent for huge archives

Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage

Backblaze B2 is currently $6.95/TB/month, with the first 10 GB free and free egress up to 3× your average monthly stored data. More importantly for your use case, B2 has an arrangement with Cloudflare that allows B2 content to be delivered through Cloudflare without B2 download fees. www.backblaze.com

So you can have:

B2 (cheap origin storage) → Cloudflare CDN → visitors

This is especially compelling if you're storing tens or hundreds of terabytes of photography but don't necessarily have enormous traffic every month.

For example, 20 TB stored would be roughly $139/month at the current B2 list price before other charges/discounts.

Best when: storage volume is enormous and you want inexpensive archival/always-hot storage while still getting CDN delivery.

3. AWS S3 + CloudFront — powerful, but usually not my cost pick

Amazon S3 and Amazon CloudFront

AWS is extremely capable and makes sense if you're already building around AWS—Lambda, Cognito, databases, image processing, etc.

CloudFront also now has flat-rate plans that bundle CDN, security features, and S3 storage credits, including plans with substantial included data transfer. aws.amazon.com

But for a relatively straightforward "store lots of JPEGs and serve them quickly" photography site, I'd generally choose R2 or B2 before S3.

Best when: your gallery is part of a larger AWS application.

4. Bunny — worth considering for a lean photography platform

Bunny.net

Bunny is worth investigating if you want a relatively simple storage + CDN architecture and don't need the broader ecosystem of AWS/Cloudflare.

I'd particularly consider it when CDN performance and simplicity are more important than having a general-purpose object-storage platform.

What I'd build for a photography business

I'd separate originals from web-delivery images.

RAW / TIFF originals
        ↓
Cheap object storage
        ↓
JPEG derivatives
        ↓
CDN
        ↓
Visitor

For example:

Option A — simplest

Cloudflare R2 → Cloudflare CDN

Option B — cheapest for very large archives

Backblaze B2 → Cloudflare CDN

And don't serve your 50–100 MB originals to gallery visitors. Generate multiple sizes, e.g.:

• 400–600 px thumbnail
• 1600–2000 px gallery image
• 3000–4000 px large image
• Original/full-resolution file only when the client downloads it

That dramatically reduces bandwidth while making galleries feel much faster.

My ranking

For a professional photographer starting today:

1. 🥇 Cloudflare R2 + Cloudflare CDN — best combination of simplicity, predictable costs, and high-traffic delivery.
2. 🥈 Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare CDN — particularly attractive once you're storing many TB.
3. 🥉 Bunny — great if you prioritize simplicity and CDN performance.
4. AWS S3 + CloudFront — excellent infrastructure, but I'd choose it primarily for an AWS-based application rather than cost.

One important distinction: storage cost isn't necessarily your biggest expense. If you tell me roughly how many TB you have, monthly page views/gallery visitors, average image size, and whether clients download originals, I can calculate the approximate monthly bill for R2 vs B2 vs S3/CloudFront and identify the cheapest architecture.

If your goal is to learn cloud compute by actually deploying websites, I’d rank the major platforms roughly like this for a beginner:

1. DigitalOcean — best place to start

For learning how websites actually run on servers, I'd probably start here.

DigitalOcean's documentation is unusually approachable: it has technical walkthroughs, examples, API/CLI references, and straightforward explanations. Its compute products include ordinary Linux VMs ("Droplets"), managed containers, PaaS, and serverless options. DigitalOcean DigitalOcean

The big advantage is that you can learn the traditional architecture:

Domain → DNS → server → Linux → web server → application → database

For example, you can start with:

1. Create a Linux VM.
2. SSH into it.
3. Install Nginx.
4. Deploy a simple website.
5. Point a domain at it.
6. Add HTTPS.
7. Install a database.
8. Deploy a small application.
9. Learn backups, monitoring and firewalls.

That's an excellent way to understand what "hosting a website" actually means.

docs.digitalocean.com

2. AWS — best long-term cloud education

If you're thinking "I eventually want professional cloud/DevOps skills", AWS is probably the platform I'd invest in after getting comfortable with the basics.

AWS has an enormous documentation ecosystem, including tutorials, architecture guidance, service documentation, decision guides and hands-on examples. Its current beginner onboarding explicitly walks newcomers through setting up an environment, IAM, cost controls, security, compute, storage and databases. Amazon Web Services, Inc. AWS Documentation AWS Builder Center

AWS also has AWS Educate, which provides beginner-oriented self-paced material and hands-on labs. Amazon Web Services

The downside is that AWS has hundreds of services, so beginners can easily get overwhelmed.

I'd learn these first:

EC2 → S3 → IAM → VPC → Route 53 → RDS → CloudFront

Don't try to learn AWS as a whole.

aws.amazon.com

3. Google Cloud — excellent structured learning

Google Cloud is particularly good if you like courses and guided learning paths rather than figuring everything out from documentation.

Google's learning platform currently offers thousands of learning resources, including courses, videos, quizzes, hands-on labs and guided learning paths. Google Cloud

Its "Getting Started with Google Cloud" path is specifically designed around introducing beginners to the fundamentals through courses, labs and skill badges. Google Skills

And Google currently offers $300 in credits for new accounts along with free usage on 20+ products, which is useful for experimentation. Cloud Documentation

cloud.google.com

4. Azure — excellent if you're interested in Microsoft

Azure has very good documentation and probably the strongest integrated learning environment of the three big cloud providers.

Microsoft Learn combines documentation, tutorials, training and learning paths, while Azure's documentation covers compute, containers, databases, networking, security, DevOps and more. Microsoft Learn

I'd particularly recommend Azure if you're interested in:

• .NET/C#
• Microsoft technologies
• Enterprise IT
• Active Directory/Entra ID
• DevOps
• Corporate cloud environments

learn.microsoft.com

My recommendation for your situation

If you said:

"I'm a beginner and I want to understand cloud compute by learning to host websites."

I'd not start by trying to master AWS.

I'd do:

DigitalOcean → AWS → whichever specialization interests you

Phase 1 — Learn how a server works

Use DigitalOcean.

Learn:

Linux → SSH → Nginx → DNS → HTTP/HTTPS → domains → firewalls → processes → logs

Build a basic website yourself.

Phase 2 — Learn cloud concepts

Move to AWS and recreate the same website using:

EC2 + S3 + Route 53 + RDS + CloudFront

Now you're learning cloud architecture rather than merely hosting.

Phase 3 — Learn modern deployment

Then learn:

Git → GitHub → Docker → CI/CD → containers → managed databases → monitoring

At that point, you'll have a much better understanding of what platforms like AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Render, Fly.io, Vercel, etc. are actually abstracting away from you.

One important tip: don't start with Kubernetes. 😄

For a beginner trying to understand compute, a single Linux VM is far more educational than immediately deploying a Kubernetes cluster.

If I were designing a beginner-to-cloud-engineer learning path specifically around hosting websites, I'd probably make it about 10–12 progressively harder projects, starting with a static site on a Linux VM and ending with a containerized, load-balanced, monitored application on AWS.

If your goal is learning cloud compute specifically for hosting websites, I’d rank the beginner experience roughly like this:

1. DigitalOcean — best starting point

DigitalOcean is probably my #1 recommendation if you're brand new.

Its documentation is unusually approachable: you can follow tutorials that actually explain concepts while showing you what commands to run. Its docs cover deploying applications, creating servers ("Droplets"), networking, databases, Docker, Kubernetes, etc. docs.digitalocean.com

The big advantage is that you can learn the fundamentals without immediately getting buried in dozens of cloud services.

Good learning progression:

Linux → SSH → web server → domain/DNS → HTTPS → firewall → database → Docker → scaling

That gives you a very good mental model of what actually happens when someone visits your website.

2. AWS — best long-term learning investment

Amazon Web Services has arguably the largest ecosystem of learning material.

Its official documentation includes tutorials, code samples, CLI references, and guides, while its Getting Started center has beginner onboarding and hands-on tutorials. aws.amazon.com

The downside is complexity. AWS has an enormous number of services, and a beginner can easily end up learning five services when they only needed one.

For learning compute, I'd focus on:

• EC2 — virtual machines
• S3 — object storage
• Route 53 — DNS
• VPC — networking
• CloudFront — CDN
• RDS — managed databases
• IAM — permissions

AWS is particularly good if you eventually want cloud/devops infrastructure to be a major part of your career.

3. Google Cloud — excellent for learning compute

Google Cloud has very good documentation and interactive tutorials. Its Compute Engine documentation includes an interactive walkthrough for creating a Linux VM and a hands-on lab for hosting a web application. docs.cloud.google.com

I particularly like Google Cloud for learning the VM → networking → web server → application model.

4. Azure — excellent structured education

Microsoft Azure is especially strong if you like structured courses and learning paths.

Microsoft Learn combines documentation, tutorials, training, and architecture material in one ecosystem. learn.microsoft.com

I'd put Azure slightly behind DigitalOcean/AWS for your particular goal, though, unless you're interested in the Microsoft ecosystem or eventually want Azure certifications.

What I'd recommend for you

If you're learning cloud compute rather than simply looking for somewhere to deploy a website, don't start with Vercel/Netlify-style platforms.

They're fantastic for deploying websites, but they hide much of the infrastructure you presumably want to understand.

I'd do:

DigitalOcean → AWS

Phase 1 — DigitalOcean

Build a simple website on a $5-ish VM and learn:

1. Create a Linux server
2. SSH into it
3. Learn basic Linux commands
4. Install Nginx
5. Serve an HTML site
6. Point a domain at it
7. Configure HTTPS
8. Configure a firewall
9. Deploy a small backend
10. Connect a database
11. Learn Docker

At that point, concepts like IP addresses, ports, DNS, HTTP, TLS, processes, reverse proxies, Linux permissions and firewalls will make much more sense.

Phase 2 — AWS

Then rebuild essentially the same architecture using AWS:

EC2 + VPC + Security Groups + Route 53 + S3 + RDS + CloudFront

That's when AWS's complexity becomes useful rather than overwhelming.

AWS itself provides beginner onboarding and hands-on tutorials, so you can use those alongside your projects. aws.amazon.com

One important distinction

There are really two different things people mean by "cloud hosting":

Learning infrastructure:

VM → Linux → Nginx → DNS → firewall → database → Docker

Learning web deployment:

GitHub → push code → automatic deployment → CDN → managed hosting

For cloud compute fundamentals, I'd strongly favor the first path initially.

If you tell me whether you're starting with HTML/JavaScript, Python, Node.js, PHP, or something else, I can suggest a beginner project that teaches cloud compute progressively without throwing 20 AWS services at you.

For a typical web app that needs serverless backend/API functions, I’d narrow the field to these:

My recommendation

If you're building a conventional web app from scratch:

1. Vercel — if you're using Next.js. It's probably the simplest developer experience: frontend, API routes/functions, deployments, domains, previews, etc.
2. AWS Lambda — if you want the broadest ecosystem and expect the backend to grow into a substantial AWS architecture. Lambda charges based on requests and execution duration, and AWS provides direct HTTP Function URLs as well as API Gateway. Amazon Web Services, Inc. AWS Documentation
3. Google Cloud Run — my favorite if your "serverless functions" may eventually become more substantial services. Cloud Run can deploy source code or containers, automatically scale to zero, and supports ordinary web services as well as functions. Google Cloud Google Cloud Documentation
4. Cloudflare Workers — particularly attractive if your app needs very low latency globally or lots of lightweight request processing.
5. Azure Functions — choose this primarily if you're already invested in Azure, .NET, Microsoft Entra, SQL Server, etc.

One notable change in 2026: Google's Cloud Functions is now called Cloud Run functions. It's essentially Google's function-oriented interface built on Cloud Run, with HTTP and event-driven triggers and automatic scaling. Google Cloud Google Cloud

If I were designing the stack

For a modern startup web app, I'd seriously consider:

Next.js → Vercel → serverless functions → managed Postgres

or, if you want more infrastructure control:

React/Next.js → Cloud Run → Cloud Run functions → managed database

The choice changes substantially depending on whether you need WebSockets, background jobs, long-running processes, a database, authentication, file storage, or high traffic.

If you tell me your frontend framework, backend language, expected traffic, database, and whether this is a startup/MVP or production enterprise app, I can recommend a specific architecture and compare the likely monthly costs.

For a web app that needs serverless functions, I’d shortlist these:

My recommendation

• If you're building a typical React/Next.js web app: Vercel is probably the easiest choice. Vercel Functions automatically scale with demand and integrate directly with the deployment/CDN workflow. Vercel
• If you want a globally distributed API with very low latency: Cloudflare Workers is particularly attractive. Workers execute on Cloudflare's global network and support JS/TS, Python and Rust. Cloudflare Cloudflare Docs
• If this is a serious backend/platform and you expect lots of AWS services: AWS Lambda is the safest long-term general-purpose choice. It scales automatically and supports a very broad set of AWS event sources. Amazon Web Services, Inc.
• If you want serverless but also want the option to run containers: Google Cloud Run / Cloud Run functions is worth serious consideration. It can automatically scale from very low traffic to millions of requests and supports container-based deployment. Google Cloud Documentation Google Cloud
• If you're already heavily invested in Microsoft: choose Azure Functions.

For most startups, I'd narrow it to Vercel vs. Cloudflare vs. AWS. Vercel wins on developer experience, Cloudflare on global edge performance, and AWS on breadth/control.

If you tell me your frontend framework (Next.js, React, Vue, etc.), backend language, database, expected traffic, and whether you need WebSockets/background jobs, I can recommend a specific architecture and provider.

If you're hosting client websites and the goal is “keep costs down, but don't let one server take everyone offline,” I'd narrow the field to DigitalOcean, AWS Lightsail, and Hetzner—with different tradeoffs.

1. DigitalOcean — my default choice

For a small agency or hosting operation, DigitalOcean is probably the sweet spot.

You can run two or three application servers behind a managed load balancer, with automated backups and a managed database. DigitalOcean's regional HTTP load balancers start at $12/month per node, while its global load balancer is $15/month. docs.digitalocean.com

For Kubernetes specifically, DOKS worker nodes start at $12/month, and HA control-plane capability is $40/month. DigitalOcean recommends at least two worker nodes to avoid downtime during maintenance. www.digitalocean.comaws.amazon.com

A sensible small-site architecture:

Cloudflare/DNS → DigitalOcean LB → 2 app servers → managed DB + object storage

That's considerably more resilient than putting 20 client sites on one $20 VPS, without jumping all the way into AWS complexity.

2. AWS Lightsail — excellent if simplicity matters

Lightsail is surprisingly good for this use case. Its load balancer is $18/month, and you can put instances in different Availability Zones behind it. AWS automatically health-checks the instances and sends traffic only to healthy targets. aws.amazon.com

The particularly nice part is the predictable pricing.

Lightsail also offers managed databases with HA plans that run a second database instance/storage disk in another Availability Zone. HA costs roughly 2× the standard database price. aws.amazon.com

I'd choose Lightsail over DigitalOcean if you're already heavily invested in AWS or expect to eventually migrate these sites into the broader AWS ecosystem.

3. Hetzner — cheapest, but you have to build more yourself

If raw hosting cost is the dominant concern, Hetzner is compelling. But the cheap VM isn't itself highly available—you need to construct the redundancy.

For example:

• 2 application VMs
• redundant/load-balanced frontend
• separate backups
• replicated or managed database
• monitoring/alerting
• infrastructure-as-code

That can produce excellent economics, but your engineering/maintenance time becomes part of the cost.

What I'd actually deploy

For ordinary WordPress/PHP/Node client sites, I'd avoid Kubernetes unless you genuinely need it.

I'd start with:

Tier 1 — inexpensive clients

• One reasonably sized server
• Automated off-server backups
• Cloudflare in front
• Monitoring + automated recovery
• Accept that a server failure can cause a short outage

Tier 2 — clients where downtime matters

• 2 application servers in separate AZs
• Load balancer
• Managed database with HA
• Object storage for uploads
• Automated backups
• Monitoring/alerting

Tier 3 — mission-critical

• Multi-AZ application layer
• HA database
• CDN/WAF
• Infrastructure-as-code
• Cross-region backups/failover

The important point is that HA isn't just “two servers.” Your database, uploaded media, DNS, deployment system, and backups can all remain single points of failure.

My ranking for your situation

🥇 DigitalOcean: best cost/complexity/redundancy balance
🥈 AWS Lightsail: best simple AWS option
🥉 Hetzner: best raw price if you have the ops expertise
AWS EC2: best when the clients justify higher complexity/cost

If you're hosting dozens of client sites, I'd lean toward DigitalOcean with a standardized two-node architecture for your higher-value clients, while keeping lower-value sites on single nodes with strong backups. That lets you sell different reliability tiers instead of paying HA costs for every client. docs.digitalocean.com

DigitalOcean pricing · AWS Lightsail pricing