SHSelfHostIndex

Actions Runner Controller vs Conductor OSS

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?
AC Actions Runner Controller Run self-hosted GitHub Actions runners on Kubernetes VS CO Conductor OSS Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
FeatureActions Runner ControllerConductor OSS
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageGoJava
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM512 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentkubernetes, helmdocker, kubernetes, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 6,422★ 32,066
First released20202016
ReplacesGitHub-hosted runnersAWS Step Functions, Camunda

Why pick each one

Choose Actions Runner Controller if…

  • Elastic CI capacity
  • Keeps builds in your cluster
Actions Runner Controller details

Choose Conductor OSS if…

  • Battle-tested at scale
  • Language-agnostic workers
Conductor OSS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Actions Runner Controller or Conductor OSS better?

Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Actions Runner Controller and Conductor OSS free and open-source?

Yes. Actions Runner Controller is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Actions Runner Controller and Conductor OSS with Docker?

Actions Runner Controller: check the project docs for container support. Conductor OSS: yes.

Related comparisons