copyparty vs Magic Wormhole

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeaturecopypartyMagic Wormhole
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITMIT
LanguagePythonPython
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM64 MB32 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarybinary
GitHub stars★ 46,121★ 22,792
First released20192016
ReplacesDropbox, Google DriveWeTransfer, AirDrop

Why pick each one

Choose copyparty if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 46.1k GitHub stars
copyparty details

Choose Magic Wormhole if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 22.8k GitHub stars
  • Written in Python
Magic Wormhole details

Frequently asked questions

Is copyparty or Magic Wormhole better?

Neither is universally better. copyparty has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are copyparty and Magic Wormhole free and open-source?

Yes. copyparty is licensed under MIT and Magic Wormhole under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run copyparty and Magic Wormhole with Docker?

copyparty: yes. Magic Wormhole: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons