Anchor CMS vs Microweber
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
Microweber
Drag-and-drop CMS with built-in online store
| Feature | Anchor CMS | Microweber |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | PHP | HTML |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,298 | ★ 3,430 |
| First released | 2012 | 2013 |
| Replaces | WordPress | WordPress, Wix |
Why pick each one
Choose Microweber if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3.4k GitHub stars)
- Written in HTML
Frequently asked questions
Is Anchor CMS or Microweber better?
Neither is universally better. Microweber 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 Microweber free and open-source?
Yes. Anchor CMS is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Microweber under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Anchor CMS and Microweber with Docker?
Anchor CMS: yes. Microweber: yes.