If a service is marketed as an "alternative" to any competitor, I think it's generally reasonable to assume that service covers most of the basic features offered by that competitor.

I've seen tons of "Heroku alternatives" pop up over the past couple months, but they all seem to have (rather large, IMO) downsides of "it does A and B like Heroku, but not X, Y, and Z" (where again, IMO, X, Y, and Z are typically rather core features like redundancy/failover). I know everyone uses services for different reasons, but the general appeal of Heroku that I've seen has been the basically-zero-devops-ever-necessary-for-anything approach they've taken.