autobrr vs Inngest
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
autobrr
Automation tool for filtering and processing release feeds
VS
Inngest
Event-driven workflow and background job platform
| Feature | autobrr | Inngest |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | GPL-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,934 | ★ 5,701 |
| First released | 2021 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Zapier | Zapier, AWS Step Functions |
Why pick each one
Choose autobrr if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (2.9k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is autobrr or Inngest better?
Neither is universally better. Inngest has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are autobrr and Inngest free and open-source?
Yes. autobrr is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Inngest under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run autobrr and Inngest with Docker?
autobrr: yes. Inngest: yes.