Cryptomator CLI vs Puter

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?
FeatureCryptomator CLIPuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-3.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaTypeScript
Setup difficultyMediumMedium
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinary, dockerdocker
GitHub stars★ 420★ 43,003
First released20172026
ReplacesBoxcryptor

Why pick each one

Choose Cryptomator CLI if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Written in Java
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Cryptomator CLI details

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Frequently asked questions

Is Cryptomator CLI or Puter better?

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

Are Cryptomator CLI and Puter free and open-source?

Yes. Cryptomator CLI is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Puter under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Cryptomator CLI and Puter with Docker?

Cryptomator CLI: yes. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons