Bareos vs ZFS Autobackup

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?
FeatureBareosZFS Autobackup
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseAGPL-3.0GPL-2.0
LanguageC++Python
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM1,024 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metalbare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 1,232★ 794
First released20102012
ReplacesVeeam, CommVaultVeeam

Why pick each one

Choose Bareos if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (1.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in C++
Bareos details

Choose ZFS Autobackup if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
ZFS Autobackup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Bareos or ZFS Autobackup better?

Neither is universally better. Bareos has the larger community, while ZFS Autobackup is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Bareos and ZFS Autobackup free and open-source?

Yes. Bareos is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and ZFS Autobackup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Bareos and ZFS Autobackup with Docker?

Bareos: yes. ZFS Autobackup: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons