Supabase Storage
File storage by Supabase
JS/TS
—
Overall Rank
Not in top 20
0%
Pick Rate
0 of 117 (CI: 0–3.2%)
0
Primary Picks
of 117 extractable
12
Alt Picks
also mentioned 5x
Competitive
Category Tier
32.5% winner dominance
In File Storage
Full comparison →AWS S338/117 (32.5%) CI: 24.7–41.4%
Local filesystem29/117 (24.8%) CI: 17.8–33.3%
Vercel Blob19/117 (16.2%) CI: 10.6–24%
Custom/DIY14/117 (12%) CI: 7.3–19.1%
By Model
Sonnet 4.5
21.4%
avg across repos
Opus 4.5
0%
avg across repos
Opus 4.6
54.5%
avg across repos
Per-Repo Breakdown
| Repo | Stack | Sonnet | Opus 4.5 | Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
InvoiceTrackerJS/TS | Vite, React 18, TypeScript | 21.4% | — | 54.5% |
Key Insight
Next.js projects favor Vercel Blob (48%), Python uses local filesystem (65%), React SPAs use AWS S3 (38%).
Frequently Asked Questions
- Does Claude Code recommend Supabase Storage?
- Supabase Storage appears in 0% of File Storage responses. The category leader is AWS S3 at 32.5%.
- What file storage tool does Claude Code prefer?
- AWS S3 leads at 32.5%. The category is classified as "Competitive" (<50% dominance). Other options include Local filesystem (24.8%) and Vercel Blob (16.2%).
- How do different Claude models compare on Supabase Storage?
- Across repos, Sonnet 4.5 averages 21.4%, Opus 4.5 averages 0%, and Opus 4.6 averages 54.5% for Supabase Storage.