Conduit vs Converse.js
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted matrix & xmpp options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Conduit
Simple, fast and reliable Matrix homeserver in Rust
VS
Converse.js
Web-based XMPP/Jabber chat client
| Feature | Conduit | Converse.js |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Matrix & XMPP | Matrix & XMPP |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MPL-2.0 |
| Language | Rust | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,200 | ★ 3,285 |
| First released | 2020 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Slack, Discord | Slack |
Why pick each one
Choose Converse.js if…
- Released under the MPL-2.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3.3k GitHub stars)
Frequently asked questions
Is Conduit or Converse.js better?
Neither is universally better. Converse.js has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Conduit and Converse.js free and open-source?
Yes. Conduit is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Converse.js under MPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Conduit and Converse.js with Docker?
Conduit: yes. Converse.js: yes.