btrbk vs Timeshift

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?
FeaturebtrbkTimeshift
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-3.0GPL-3.0
LanguagePerlVala
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM64 MB128 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, binarybinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 2,125★ 4,219
First released20142014
ReplacesTime MachineTime Machine, System Restore

Why pick each one

Choose btrbk if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Active community (2.1k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Perl
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
btrbk details

Choose Timeshift if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Vala
Timeshift details

Frequently asked questions

Is btrbk or Timeshift better?

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

Are btrbk and Timeshift free and open-source?

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

Can I run btrbk and Timeshift with Docker?

btrbk: check the project docs for container support. Timeshift: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons