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.
Conduit
Simple, fast and reliable Matrix homeserver in Rust
VS
Converse.js
Web-based XMPP/Jabber chat client
| Feature | Conduit | Converse.js |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Under-an-hour setup |
| 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 | ★ 3,294 |
| First released | 2020 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Slack, Discord | Slack |
What are Conduit and Converse.js?
Conduit
Conduit is a lightweight Matrix homeserver written in Rust that aims to be easy to set up and run on small servers. It uses an embedded database and requires minimal configuration.
- Embedded database, no external DB
- Very low resource usage
- Single binary deployment
- Matrix federation support
Converse.js
Converse.js is a free and open-source XMPP chat client that runs in the browser. It can be embedded into websites or hosted as a standalone full-page chat application.
- Embeddable XMPP web client
- OMEMO encryption support
- Plugin architecture
- Works with any XMPP server
Conduit vs Converse.js: key differences
Conduit is written in Rust, while Converse.js is built with JavaScript. Licensing differs — Apache-2.0 for Conduit versus MPL-2.0 for Converse.js. Converse.js is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 128 MB for Conduit. Converse.js is the more established project (first released 2013), while Conduit arrived in 2020.
Why pick each one
Choose Conduit if…
- Extremely easy to deploy
- Runs on a Raspberry Pi
Watch out for
- Not all Matrix features implemented
- Smaller ecosystem
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)
Watch out for
- Requires an XMPP server
- No voice or video
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.
Which is lighter on resources, Conduit or Converse.js?
Converse.js has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for Conduit. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.