Back In Time vs Rustic
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Back In Time
Simple backup tool inspired by Apple Time Machine
VS
Rustic
Fast encrypted deduplicated backup compatible with Restic
| Feature | Back In Time | Rustic |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Python | Rust |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary | binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,641 | ★ 3,170 |
| First released | 2008 | 2022 |
| Replaces | Time Machine | Backblaze, CrashPlan |
Why pick each one
Choose Back In Time if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (2.6k GitHub stars)
- Written in Python
Choose Rustic if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- Active community (3.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Back In Time or Rustic better?
Neither is universally better. Rustic has the larger community, while Back In Time is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Back In Time and Rustic free and open-source?
Yes. Back In Time is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Rustic under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Back In Time and Rustic with Docker?
Back In Time: check the project docs for container support. Rustic: check the project docs for container support.