Anchor CMS vs Keystone
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted content management systems options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Anchor CMS
Lightweight blogging-focused CMS
VS
Keystone
Headless CMS framework with a powerful GraphQL API
| Feature | Anchor CMS | Keystone |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | PHP | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,298 | ★ 9,938 |
| First released | 2012 | 2013 |
| Replaces | WordPress | Contentful, Strapi |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Anchor CMS or Keystone better?
Neither is universally better. Keystone has the larger community, while Anchor CMS is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Anchor CMS and Keystone free and open-source?
Yes. Anchor CMS is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Keystone under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Anchor CMS and Keystone with Docker?
Anchor CMS: yes. Keystone: yes.