Bitwarden vs Buttercup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted password managers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Bitwarden
Open-source password manager you can self-host
VS
Buttercup
Archived
Cross-platform password manager with multiple storage backends
| Feature | Bitwarden | Buttercup |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Read-the-docs project |
| Health score | 96 · Excellent | 15 · At risk |
| Status | Actively maintained | Archived |
| Category | Password Managers | Password Managers |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | C# | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 20,190 | ★ 4,388 |
| First released | 2016 | 2015 |
| Replaces | 1Password, LastPass, Dashlane | 1Password, LastPass |
What are Bitwarden and Buttercup?
Bitwarden
Bitwarden is an open-source password manager offering encrypted vaults, sharing, and apps on every platform, with a self-hostable server. It targets individuals and teams wanting an audited password manager. It is deployed via Docker.
- Encrypted cross-platform vaults
- Secure password sharing
- Regular third-party audits
- Self-hostable official server
Buttercup
Buttercup is a free, open-source password manager available for desktop, mobile and browsers. Vaults are stored in an encrypted format and can sync through Dropbox, WebDAV, Google Drive or local files.
- Encrypted vaults with multiple backends
- WebDAV and cloud storage sync
- Browser extensions for autofill
- Cross-platform desktop and mobile apps
Bitwarden vs Buttercup: key differences
The biggest difference is maintenance: Buttercup's repository is archived and no longer developed, while Bitwarden is actively maintained. Bitwarden is written in C#, while Buttercup is built with TypeScript. Licensing differs — AGPL-3.0 for Bitwarden versus GPL-3.0 for Buttercup. Buttercup is the lighter option, starting around 128 MB of RAM against 2,048 MB for Bitwarden. Bitwarden has the considerably larger community, at 20,190 GitHub stars versus 4,388. Bitwarden lists first-class Docker deployment; Buttercup does not.
Why pick each one
Choose Bitwarden if…
- Audited and trusted
- Apps everywhere
- Open source
Watch out for
- Official server is resource heavy
- Setup more complex than Vaultwarden
Choose Buttercup if…
- Flexible storage options
- Clean modern UI
Watch out for
- Sync relies on third-party storage
Frequently asked questions
Is Bitwarden or Buttercup better?
Neither is universally better. Bitwarden has the larger community, while Buttercup is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Bitwarden and Buttercup free and open-source?
Yes. Bitwarden is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Buttercup under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Bitwarden and Buttercup with Docker?
Bitwarden: yes. Buttercup: check the project docs for container support.
Which is lighter on resources, Bitwarden or Buttercup?
Buttercup has the smaller minimum footprint at 128 MB of RAM, compared to about 2,048 MB for Bitwarden. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.