Cloudreve vs Kubo (IPFS)
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Cloudreve
File management and sharing system, supports multiple storage
VS
Kubo (IPFS)
Reference implementation of the InterPlanetary File System
| Feature | Cloudreve | Kubo (IPFS) |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, binary, snap |
| GitHub stars | ★ 28,485 | ★ 17,093 |
| First released | 2026 | 2015 |
| Replaces | — | Dropbox |
Why pick each one
Choose Cloudreve if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 28.5k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Choose Kubo (IPFS) if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 17.1k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is Cloudreve or Kubo (IPFS) better?
Cloudreve is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Kubo (IPFS) if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Cloudreve and Kubo (IPFS) free and open-source?
Yes. Cloudreve is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Kubo (IPFS) under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Cloudreve and Kubo (IPFS) with Docker?
Cloudreve: yes. Kubo (IPFS): yes.