Budibase 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?
Budibase
Low-code platform to build internal tools and automations
VS
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
| Feature | Budibase | Conductor OSS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | TypeScript | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 28,190 | ★ 32,066 |
| First released | 2019 | 2016 |
| Replaces | Microsoft Power Apps, Retool, Airtable | AWS Step Functions, Camunda |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Budibase or Conductor OSS better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Budibase is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Budibase and Conductor OSS free and open-source?
Yes. Budibase is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Budibase and Conductor OSS with Docker?
Budibase: yes. Conductor OSS: yes.