Conductor OSS vs Dagster

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

Not the right match-up?
FeatureConductor OSSDagster
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaPython
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM2,048 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, helm
GitHub stars★ 32,066★ 15,943
First released20162019
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaAWS Step Functions, Azure Data Factory

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

  • Battle-tested at scale
  • Language-agnostic workers
Conductor OSS details

Choose Dagster if…

  • Strong developer tooling
  • Great for data-centric teams
Dagster details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or Dagster better?

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

Are Conductor OSS and Dagster free and open-source?

Yes. Conductor OSS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Dagster under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Conductor OSS and Dagster with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. Dagster: yes.

Related comparisons