Backrest vs Bupstash
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?
Backrest
Web UI and orchestrator for Restic backups
VS
Bupstash
Easy and efficient encrypted backups
| Feature | Backrest | Bupstash |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | Rust |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,071 | ★ 924 |
| First released | 2024 | 2020 |
| Replaces | Backblaze | Backblaze, CrashPlan |
Why pick each one
Choose Bupstash if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Backrest or Bupstash better?
Backrest is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Bupstash if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Backrest and Bupstash free and open-source?
Yes. Backrest is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Bupstash under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Backrest and Bupstash with Docker?
Backrest: yes. Bupstash: check the project docs for container support.