YeetCode vs Makerkit: application source or team SaaS kit?
Makerkit’s Next.js Supabase kit is a strong candidate when customer teams, permissions and subscription billing define the product. YeetCode is a different starting point: a working source-selling application with Clerk, Convex and a reusable multi-app structure.
By YeetCode · Reviewed
Published by YeetCode. Our assessment uses public vendor sources and the YeetCode repository, not independent testing of every product. Scope: Makerkit’s Next.js Supabase Turbo documentation and current license. Other Makerkit kits can differ. No private-code audit was performed.
What does Makerkit provide?
Makerkit sells SaaS starter kits. The Supabase edition’s documentation uses personal and team accounts as the basis of application data. Database policies protect account-owned records. This is a meaningful foundation for a business product where customers invite colleagues and work in separate organisations.
YeetCode’s shared backend connects its two storefronts to the same identity and source purchases. That architecture is useful for a single product serving multiple markets. It does not mean a buyer receives complete tenant isolation for an unrelated business SaaS.
At a glance
The trade-offs that change what you need to build.
Data and identity
- YeetCode
- Clerk and Convex with a shared backend for the included storefronts.
- Makerkit
- Supabase-based personal and team accounts, with account-scoped data and row-level security patterns.Makerkit Supabase architecture
Billing
- YeetCode
- A working one-time source-purchase flow through Polar.
- Makerkit
- A billing gateway for Stripe, Lemon Squeezy or Paddle. Supported models depend on the provider.Makerkit Supabase billing
Commercial delivery
- YeetCode
- MIT permits reuse and distribution of the supplied source with notices preserved.
- Makerkit
- Developer and Team licenses differ. The current terms require Team licensing for client work and client licensing for source handover or dedicated client instances.Makerkit license & client work
Purchase model
- YeetCode
- Buy a named release. Future source releases and your project maintenance are separate.
- Makerkit
- A paid kit with advertised lifetime updates. Check the selected kit and license before purchase.Makerkit product & current plans
Team accounts are a product requirement
If the first customer needs invitations, roles and an organisation workspace, put those requirements at the centre of your evaluation. Makerkit’s account model directly addresses that class of application. Its documented approach still needs correct policies when you add new tables and features.
YeetCode is easier to assess through the product it already runs: users buy a release and receive access to source. A team purchasing for internal development is different from a product that sells isolated customer workspaces. Building the second on YeetCode needs additional domain models, permission rules and tests.
Provider choice and billing depth
Makerkit’s Supabase billing documentation covers recurring, one-off, per-seat and usage-based models, with provider-specific constraints. Evaluate the exact combination your product will use. A feature in the billing overview is not a promise that every gateway implements it identically.
YeetCode’s Polar integration is narrower: the buyer purchases a selected source release. You get that working application flow, not a completed subscription service. If your roadmap starts with seat changes or metered invoices, include that extra implementation work in the comparison.
Make client handover part of the estimate
For an agency, a license affects who can receive the repository and operate a dedicated deployment. Makerkit’s current terms explicitly distinguish a hosted SaaS’s end users from bespoke clients. Confirm the required licenses while scoping the engagement, before promising a source handover.
YeetCode’s included MIT license permits commercial modification and distribution when the notices remain. Your client still needs a clear agreement about delivery, service ownership and maintenance. Separate client systems need their own appropriate service configuration. Shared source does not automatically synchronise projects after handover.
Which should you choose?
Choose YeetCode if…
- You need the demonstrated purchase and source-library application.
- You prefer the Clerk and Convex integrations and a separate prototype app.
- MIT source handover matters more than included team-billing features.
Choose Makerkit if…
- Your first release needs a documented team-account architecture.
- You want the Supabase data model and its database policy workflow.
- Its billing options and applicable commercial license fit your delivery plan.
Before you decide
Does YeetCode include Makerkit-style multi-tenancy?
Do not assume equivalence. YeetCode’s storefronts share one application backend. Your own tenant boundaries, roles and customer data model need design and implementation.
Does buying source remove running costs?
No. Both approaches need services and maintenance. Compare the relevant license, hosting, identity, database, payment charges and engineering work. See the YeetCode catalog for its live USD release price.
Inspect the application you would build on
Review the current release, changelog and USD price. A purchase includes that source ZIP under MIT. Your service accounts, product development and maintenance are separate. Future releases do not update your project automatically.
See source & USD price