acme.sh vs Emissary-ingress

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
Featureacme.shEmissary-ingress
CategoryReverse Proxy & GatewaysReverse Proxy & Gateways
LicenseGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguageShellPython
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM32 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinary, sourcekubernetes, helm
GitHub stars★ 47,426★ 4,518
First released20162017
ReplacesCertbotAWS API Gateway, Kong

Why pick each one

Choose acme.sh if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 47.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in Shell
acme.sh details

Choose Emissary-ingress if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Active community (4.5k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Python
Emissary-ingress details

Frequently asked questions

Is acme.sh or Emissary-ingress better?

acme.sh is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Emissary-ingress if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are acme.sh and Emissary-ingress free and open-source?

Yes. acme.sh is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Emissary-ingress under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run acme.sh and Emissary-ingress with Docker?

acme.sh: check the project docs for container support. Emissary-ingress: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons