SHSelfHostIndex

Jitsi Videobridge vs MiroTalk SFU

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted video conferencing options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
JI Jitsi Videobridge Scalable WebRTC-compatible video routing engine VS MI MiroTalk SFU Simple, secure, scalable real-time video conferences up to 4k,
FeatureJitsi VideobridgeMiroTalk SFU
CategoryVideo ConferencingVideo Conferencing
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageKotlinJavaScript
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metal, sourcedocker
GitHub stars★ 3,093★ 3,080
First released20132020
ReplacesZoom, Twilio—

Why pick each one

Choose Jitsi Videobridge if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.1k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Kotlin
Jitsi Videobridge details

Choose MiroTalk SFU if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.1k GitHub stars)
  • Written in JavaScript
MiroTalk SFU details

Frequently asked questions

Is Jitsi Videobridge or MiroTalk SFU better?

Neither is universally better. Jitsi Videobridge has the larger community, while MiroTalk SFU is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Jitsi Videobridge and MiroTalk SFU free and open-source?

Yes. Jitsi Videobridge is licensed under Apache-2.0 and MiroTalk SFU under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Jitsi Videobridge and MiroTalk SFU with Docker?

Jitsi Videobridge: yes. MiroTalk SFU: yes.

Related comparisons