SHSelfHostIndex

File Browser vs SFTPGo

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?
File Browser Archived Lightweight web file manager for a directory VS SFTPGo Full-featured SFTP, FTP and WebDAV server
FeatureFile BrowserSFTPGo
Deploy effortUnder-an-hour setupUnder-an-hour setup
Health score15 · At risk94 · Excellent
StatusArchivedActively maintained
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageGoGo
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM64 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarydocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 35,937★ 12,570
First released20172019
ReplacesDropboxDropbox

What are File Browser and SFTPGo?

File Browser

File Browser provides a clean web interface to manage files within a specified directory, supporting upload, download, sharing, and user accounts. It suits users who want simple browser-based access to a folder rather than a full sync platform. It ships as a single Go binary and a small Docker image.

  • Single-binary web file manager
  • User accounts and share links
  • Built-in editor and previews
  • Minimal resource usage

Read the full File Browser guide →

SFTPGo

SFTPGo is a configurable file transfer server supporting SFTP, FTP/S, WebDAV, and HTTP access with cloud storage backends. It suits administrators who need secure, multi-protocol file access. It is deployed via Docker or a single binary.

  • SFTP, FTP, WebDAV and HTTP support
  • Cloud storage backends
  • Per-user quotas and rules
  • Web admin and REST API

Read the full SFTPGo guide →

File Browser vs SFTPGo: key differences

The biggest difference is maintenance: File Browser's repository is archived and no longer developed, while SFTPGo is actively maintained. Both projects are written in Go. Licensing differs — Apache-2.0 for File Browser versus AGPL-3.0 for SFTPGo. File Browser is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 128 MB for SFTPGo. File Browser is the more established project (first released 2017), while SFTPGo arrived in 2019. File Browser has the considerably larger community, at 35,937 GitHub stars versus 12,570.

Why pick each one

Choose File Browser if…

  • Extremely lightweight
  • Trivial to deploy
  • Good for quick file access

Watch out for

  • No sync client
  • Limited collaboration features
File Browser details

Choose SFTPGo if…

  • Multi-protocol in one binary
  • Flexible storage backends
  • Strong access controls

Watch out for

  • No sync client
  • Configuration can be complex
SFTPGo details

Frequently asked questions

Is File Browser or SFTPGo better?

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

Are File Browser and SFTPGo free and open-source?

Yes. File Browser is licensed under Apache-2.0 and SFTPGo under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run File Browser and SFTPGo with Docker?

File Browser: yes. SFTPGo: yes.

Which is lighter on resources, File Browser or SFTPGo?

File Browser has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for SFTPGo. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons