FreeFileSync 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?
FeatureFreeFileSyncPuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-3.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageC++TypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM128 MB512 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, binarydocker
GitHub stars★ 1,601★ 43,003
First released20082026
ReplacesDropbox, rsync

Why pick each one

Choose FreeFileSync if…

  • Clear visual diffs
  • Reliable batch automation
FreeFileSync 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 FreeFileSync or Puter better?

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

Are FreeFileSync and Puter free and open-source?

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

Can I run FreeFileSync and Puter with Docker?

FreeFileSync: check the project docs for container support. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons