Converse.js vs Element Call
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?
| Feature | Converse.js | Element Call |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Matrix & XMPP | Matrix & XMPP |
| License | MPL-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,285 | ★ 984 |
| First released | 2013 | 2022 |
| Replaces | Slack | Zoom, Google Meet |
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)
Choose Element Call if…
- Strong encryption
- Federated via Matrix
- No app install needed
Frequently asked questions
Is Converse.js or Element Call better?
Converse.js is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Element Call if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Converse.js and Element Call free and open-source?
Yes. Converse.js is licensed under MPL-2.0 and Element Call under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Converse.js and Element Call with Docker?
Converse.js: yes. Element Call: yes.