Conductor OSS vs Leek
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?
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
VS
Leek
Monitoring and issue detection for Celery task queues
| Feature | Conductor OSS | Leek |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Java | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 32,066 | ★ 205 |
| First released | 2016 | 2020 |
| Replaces | AWS Step Functions, Camunda | Flower |
Why pick each one
Choose Leek if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in TypeScript
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Conductor OSS or Leek better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Leek is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Conductor OSS and Leek free and open-source?
Yes. Conductor OSS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Leek under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Conductor OSS and Leek with Docker?
Conductor OSS: yes. Leek: yes.