Conductor OSS vs Flowable

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 OSSFlowable
Deploy effortUnder-an-hour setupUnder-an-hour setup
Health score98 · Excellent89 · Excellent
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaJava
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM2,048 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 32,225★ 9,551
First released20162016
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaMicrosoft Power Automate, Camunda

What are Conductor OSS and Flowable?

Conductor OSS

Conductor is a platform created to orchestrate microservices and business processes at scale. It lets teams define workflows as JSON and run them across distributed task workers.

  • JSON-defined workflows
  • Distributed task workers
  • Visual workflow editor
  • Built for microservice orchestration

Read the full Conductor OSS guide →

Flowable

Flowable is a compact and efficient open-source workflow and business process management platform. It executes BPMN, CMMN and DMN models and embeds easily into Java applications.

  • BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines
  • Embeddable Java library
  • REST API and modeler apps
  • Case management support

Read the full Flowable guide →

Conductor OSS vs Flowable: key differences

Both projects are written in Java. Flowable is the lighter option, starting around 1,024 MB of RAM against 2,048 MB for Conductor OSS. Conductor OSS has the considerably larger community, at 32,225 GitHub stars versus 9,551.

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

  • Battle-tested at scale
  • Language-agnostic workers

Watch out for

  • Java stack is resource heavy
Conductor OSS details

Choose Flowable if…

  • Lightweight process engine
  • Standards compliant

Watch out for

  • Java-centric
Flowable details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or Flowable better?

Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Conductor OSS and Flowable free and open-source?

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

Can I run Conductor OSS and Flowable with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. Flowable: yes.

Which is lighter on resources, Conductor OSS or Flowable?

Flowable has the smaller minimum footprint at 1,024 MB of RAM, compared to about 2,048 MB for Conductor OSS. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons