Candy vs Centrifugo
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted chat & communication options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Candy
JavaScript-based multi-user XMPP chat client
VS
Centrifugo
Scalable real-time messaging server for apps and websites
| Feature | Candy | Centrifugo |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Chat & Communication | Chat & Communication |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 32 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | docker, kubernetes, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,314 | ★ 10,590 |
| First released | 2011 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Chatango | Pusher, Firebase Realtime Database |
Why pick each one
Choose Candy if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (1.3k GitHub stars)
- Written in JavaScript
Frequently asked questions
Is Candy or Centrifugo better?
Neither is universally better. Centrifugo has the larger community, while Candy is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Candy and Centrifugo free and open-source?
Yes. Candy is licensed under MIT and Centrifugo under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Candy and Centrifugo with Docker?
Candy: check the project docs for container support. Centrifugo: yes.