BackupNinja vs BackupPC
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
BackupPC
High-performance backup system for PCs and servers
| Feature | BackupNinja | BackupPC |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Read-the-docs project | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 2 · At risk | 57 · Fair |
| Status | Archived | Actively maintained |
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Shell | Perl |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | bare-metal, docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 68 | ★ 1,626 |
| First released | 2004 | 2001 |
| Replaces | CrashPlan | CrashPlan, Time Machine |
What are BackupNinja and BackupPC?
BackupNinja
Backupninja lets you coordinate system backups through a central configuration directory of simple files. It supports many backends including rdiff-backup, rsync, duplicity, and database dumps.
- Central config directory
- Many backup backends
- Database dump handlers
BackupPC
BackupPC is a high-performance system for backing up Linux, Windows, and macOS PCs to a server's disk. It uses pooling and compression to minimize disk usage, with a full web interface.
- File pooling deduplication
- Web management interface
- No client software required
BackupNinja vs BackupPC: key differences
The biggest difference is maintenance: BackupNinja's repository is archived and no longer developed, while BackupPC is actively maintained. BackupNinja is written in Shell, while BackupPC is built with Perl. Licensing differs — GPL-2.0 for BackupNinja versus GPL-3.0 for BackupPC. BackupNinja is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 512 MB for BackupPC. BackupPC is the more established project (first released 2001), while BackupNinja arrived in 2004. BackupPC has the considerably larger community, at 1,626 GitHub stars versus 68. BackupPC lists first-class Docker deployment; BackupNinja does not.
Why pick each one
Choose BackupNinja if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in Shell
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Choose BackupPC if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.6k GitHub stars)
- Written in Perl
Frequently asked questions
Is BackupNinja or BackupPC better?
Neither is universally better. BackupPC has the larger community, while BackupNinja is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are BackupNinja and BackupPC free and open-source?
Yes. BackupNinja is licensed under GPL-2.0 and BackupPC under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run BackupNinja and BackupPC with Docker?
BackupNinja: check the project docs for container support. BackupPC: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, BackupNinja or BackupPC?
BackupNinja has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 512 MB for BackupPC. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.