Duplicati vs rdiff-backup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Duplicati
Free backup software with a friendly web UI
VS
rdiff-backup
Reverse-incremental backups preserving file history
| Feature | Duplicati | rdiff-backup |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | C# | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 14,864 | ★ 1,264 |
| First released | 2008 | 2001 |
| Replaces | Backblaze, Carbonite | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose rdiff-backup if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Active community (1.3k GitHub stars)
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Duplicati or rdiff-backup better?
Duplicati is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider rdiff-backup if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Duplicati and rdiff-backup free and open-source?
Yes. Duplicati is licensed under MIT and rdiff-backup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Duplicati and rdiff-backup with Docker?
Duplicati: yes. rdiff-backup: check the project docs for container support.