Cryptomator CLI vs SeaweedFS

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 CLISeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaGo
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinary, dockerdocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 420★ 33,952
First released20172015
ReplacesBoxcryptorAmazon S3

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 SeaweedFS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 34k GitHub stars
SeaweedFS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Cryptomator CLI or SeaweedFS better?

Neither is universally better. SeaweedFS has the larger community, while Cryptomator CLI is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Cryptomator CLI and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

Yes. Cryptomator CLI is licensed under GPL-3.0 and SeaweedFS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Cryptomator CLI and SeaweedFS with Docker?

Cryptomator CLI: yes. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons