Zigbee2MQTT Frontend vs ntfy

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted home automation options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureZigbee2MQTT Frontendntfy
CategoryHome AutomationHome Automation
LicenseMITApache-2.0
LanguageTypeScriptGo
Setup difficultyHardEasy
Min. RAM128 MB64 MB
Deploymentsource, dockerdocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 561★ 33,263
First released20182021
ReplacesPhilips Hue BridgePushover, Pushbullet

Why pick each one

Choose Zigbee2MQTT Frontend if…

  • Foundation of an open Zigbee stack
  • Broad hardware support
Zigbee2MQTT Frontend details

Choose ntfy if…

  • Extremely easy to use
  • Cross-platform apps
ntfy details

Frequently asked questions

Is Zigbee2MQTT Frontend or ntfy better?

ntfy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Zigbee2MQTT Frontend if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Zigbee2MQTT Frontend and ntfy free and open-source?

Yes. Zigbee2MQTT Frontend is licensed under MIT and ntfy under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Zigbee2MQTT Frontend and ntfy with Docker?

Zigbee2MQTT Frontend: yes. ntfy: yes.

Related comparisons