SHSelfHostIndex

Conductor OSS vs Firecrawl

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?
CO Conductor OSS Microservices and workflow orchestration engine VS FI Firecrawl Turn websites into clean data for AI applications
FeatureConductor OSSFirecrawl
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaTypeScript
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM2,048 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, source
GitHub stars★ 32,066★ 162,961
First released20162024
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaApify

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

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

Choose Firecrawl if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 163k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Firecrawl details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or Firecrawl better?

Firecrawl is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Conductor OSS if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Conductor OSS and Firecrawl free and open-source?

Yes. Conductor OSS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Firecrawl under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Conductor OSS and Firecrawl with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. Firecrawl: yes.

Related comparisons