Candy vs Papercups
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
Papercups
Open-source live chat and customer messaging
| Feature | Candy | Papercups |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Chat & Communication | Chat & Communication |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | Elixir |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 32 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,314 | ★ 6,097 |
| First released | 2011 | 2020 |
| Replaces | Chatango | Intercom, Drift |
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
Choose Papercups if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 6.1k GitHub stars
- Written in Elixir
Frequently asked questions
Is Candy or Papercups better?
Neither is universally better. Papercups 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 Papercups free and open-source?
Yes. Candy is licensed under MIT and Papercups under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Candy and Papercups with Docker?
Candy: check the project docs for container support. Papercups: yes.