Beehive vs Conductor OSS
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Beehive
Event and agent system for connecting things
VS
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
| Feature | Beehive | Conductor OSS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 6,485 | ★ 32,066 |
| First released | 2015 | 2016 |
| Replaces | IFTTT | AWS Step Functions, Camunda |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Beehive or Conductor OSS better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Beehive is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Beehive and Conductor OSS free and open-source?
Yes. Beehive is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Beehive and Conductor OSS with Docker?
Beehive: yes. Conductor OSS: yes.