CKAN vs BackupNinja
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
| Feature | CKAN | BackupNinja |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | Python | Shell |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,088 | ★ 68 |
| First released | 2026 | 2004 |
| Replaces | — | CrashPlan |
Why pick each one
Choose CKAN if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Mature project with 5.1k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Choose BackupNinja if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in Shell
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is CKAN or BackupNinja better?
Neither is universally better. CKAN has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are CKAN and BackupNinja free and open-source?
Yes. CKAN is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and BackupNinja under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run CKAN and BackupNinja with Docker?
CKAN: check the project docs for container support. BackupNinja: check the project docs for container support.