Concrete CMS vs Ghost
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted content management systems options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Concrete CMS
In-context editing CMS for marketers and site owners
VS
Ghost
Professional publishing platform for blogs and newsletters
| Feature | Concrete CMS | Ghost |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | PHP | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 850 | ★ 54,707 |
| First released | 2008 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Wix, Squarespace | WordPress, Substack, Medium |
Why pick each one
Choose Concrete CMS if…
- Very approachable for non-technical editors
- No separate admin needed for content
Choose Ghost if…
- Excellent for newsletters and memberships
- Clean, fast publishing experience
Frequently asked questions
Is Concrete CMS or Ghost better?
Neither is universally better. Ghost has the larger community, while Concrete CMS is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Concrete CMS and Ghost free and open-source?
Yes. Concrete CMS is licensed under MIT and Ghost under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Concrete CMS and Ghost with Docker?
Concrete CMS: yes. Ghost: yes.