Conductor OSS vs Flyte

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 OSSFlyte
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaGo
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM2,048 MB4,096 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metalkubernetes, helm
GitHub stars★ 32,066★ 7,184
First released20162019
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaApache Airflow

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

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

Choose Flyte if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 7.2k GitHub stars
  • Written in Go
Flyte details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or Flyte 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 Flyte free and open-source?

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

Can I run Conductor OSS and Flyte with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. Flyte: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons