Buttercup vs Rubywarden
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted password managers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Buttercup
Cross-platform password manager with multiple storage backends
VS
Rubywarden
Experimental Ruby implementation of the Bitwarden API
| Feature | Buttercup | Rubywarden |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Password Managers | Password Managers |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 4,394 | ★ 589 |
| First released | 2015 | 2017 |
| Replaces | 1Password, LastPass | Bitwarden, 1Password |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Buttercup or Rubywarden better?
Buttercup is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Rubywarden if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Buttercup and Rubywarden free and open-source?
Yes. Buttercup is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Rubywarden under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Buttercup and Rubywarden with Docker?
Buttercup: check the project docs for container support. Rubywarden: check the project docs for container support.