SHSelfHostIndex

Backrest vs Sanoid

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?
BA Backrest Web UI and orchestrator for Restic backups VS SA Sanoid Policy-driven ZFS snapshot management and replication
FeatureBackrestSanoid
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-3.0GPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptPerl
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM256 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarybare-metal
GitHub stars★ 7,071★ 3,830
First released20242014
ReplacesBackblazeTime Machine

Why pick each one

Choose Backrest if…

  • Makes Restic approachable
  • Good scheduling
  • Lightweight
Backrest details

Choose Sanoid if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Active community (3.8k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Perl
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Sanoid details

Frequently asked questions

Is Backrest or Sanoid better?

Backrest is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Sanoid if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Backrest and Sanoid free and open-source?

Yes. Backrest is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Sanoid under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Backrest and Sanoid with Docker?

Backrest: yes. Sanoid: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons