Compare

SimpleQ vs Trigger.dev

Different tools for different needs. SimpleQ is transport — it delivers jobs to your webhook with a three-signal ack protocol, backpressure that never burns retries, and queue templates tuned for AI workloads. You run the code in your own infrastructure. Trigger.dev is task orchestration — it runs your code in a managed environment with integrations, scheduling, and durable execution.

FeatureSimpleQTrigger.dev
CategoryManaged queue (transport)Task orchestration (managed execution)
Runs your code?No — delivers to your webhook. You own the execution.Yes — runs your tasks in managed infra
Delivery modelPush (webhook POST)Push (executes your task code)
Durable executionNoYes — resumable, long-running tasks
RetriesConfigurable per queueConfigurable per task
Rate limitingPer-queue fixed-window, built-inConcurrency control per task
Ack modeThree-signal protocol: ack (success), nack (failure with retryable flag), defer (backpressure — redelivers without burning attempts)N/A — execution is managed
Backpressure429/503/529 auto-defers with Retry-After relay. A job can ride out 100 consecutive 429s and still complete — no attempt burned.Task-level retry with backoff (counts against retry budget)
Queue templatestemplate: "anthropic" or "openai" — one field configures ack mode, timeout, and backoff tuned for each provider's APINone
IdempotencyPublish-boundary dedup — returns existing job ID on duplicateIdempotency key
Per-job audit trailFull attempt history: status, error, HTTP code, timestamp per attemptPer-task execution logs
Webhook signingHMAC-SHA256 with per-queue secretN/A (managed execution)
IntegrationsNone — HTTP endpoint agnostic, works with any frameworkBuilt-in integrations (OpenAI, Resend, etc.)
Cron / schedulingNot yetYes — scheduled triggers
Self-hostableNoYes (open-source)

When to choose SimpleQ

  • You want to run your code in your own infrastructure — not hand execution to a third-party runtime. Your workers are plain HTTP endpoints, deployable anywhere, in any framework, on any cloud.
  • Your LLM calls return 429s and you need explicit backpressure control. SimpleQ's defer mechanism holds the job and redelivers after the Retry-After delay — no attempt burned. A job can ride out a sustained outage and still complete.
  • Your workload is "queue a job, deliver it to my endpoint" — not multi-step orchestration. SimpleQ's publish-deliver-ack model is simpler than a task orchestration framework.
  • You want one POST to configure a production-ready AI queue. template: "anthropic" or "openai" sets ack mode, timeout, and backoff tuned for each provider's API.
  • You need per-job audit trails with full attempt history — status, error, HTTP code, timestamp per attempt.
  • Different teams own different queues. SimpleQ's HMAC signing secrets are per-queue — a leaked secret affects one queue, not the org.

When to choose Trigger.dev

  • You want managed execution — no webhook endpoint to deploy, scale, or keep alive. Trigger.dev runs your code for you.
  • You need long-running, resumable tasks with checkpoint-based durability and scheduled triggers.

Can you use both?

Yes. Some teams use Trigger.dev for complex orchestration tasks that benefit from managed execution, and SimpleQ for high-throughput delivery where they want ownership of the worker, explicit backpressure signals, and per-queue rate limiting. SimpleQ handles the transport; Trigger.dev handles the orchestration. If your LLM call is a single job that needs reliable delivery with backpressure control, SimpleQ is the simpler path — especially with template: "anthropic" or "openai".