Converse.js vs JSXC
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 | JSXC |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Matrix & XMPP | Matrix & XMPP |
| License | MPL-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,285 | ★ 732 |
| First released | 2013 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Slack | 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)
Choose JSXC if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Written in TypeScript
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Converse.js or JSXC better?
Converse.js is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider JSXC if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Converse.js and JSXC free and open-source?
Yes. Converse.js is licensed under MPL-2.0 and JSXC under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Converse.js and JSXC with Docker?
Converse.js: yes. JSXC: check the project docs for container support.