Conduit vs Element Web
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
Element Web
Glossy Matrix client for the web and desktop
| Feature | Conduit | Element Web |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Matrix & XMPP | Matrix & XMPP |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Rust | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,200 | ★ 13,353 |
| First released | 2020 | 2016 |
| Replaces | Slack, Discord | Slack, Discord, Microsoft Teams |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Conduit or Element Web better?
Neither is universally better. Element Web has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Conduit and Element Web free and open-source?
Yes. Conduit is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Element Web under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Conduit and Element Web with Docker?
Conduit: yes. Element Web: yes.