Caddy vs Pound
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Caddy
Fast, multi-platform web server with automatic HTTPS
VS
Pound
Lightweight reverse proxy and HTTPS load balancer
| Feature | Caddy | Pound |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 32 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, bare-metal | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 74,748 | ★ 70 |
| First released | 2015 | 2002 |
| Replaces | Nginx, Apache | NGINX, HAProxy |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Caddy or Pound better?
Neither is universally better. Caddy has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Caddy and Pound free and open-source?
Yes. Caddy is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Pound under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Caddy and Pound with Docker?
Caddy: yes. Pound: check the project docs for container support.