Filestash vs Stirling PDF
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted document management options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Filestash
Web-based file manager and document gateway
VS
Stirling PDF
Powerful locally hosted web-based PDF toolkit
| Feature | Filestash | Stirling PDF |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Document Management | Document Management |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Go | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 14,451 | ★ 89,077 |
| First released | 2017 | 2023 |
| Replaces | Dropbox, SharePoint | Adobe Acrobat, Smallpdf |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Filestash or Stirling PDF better?
Neither is universally better. Stirling PDF has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Filestash and Stirling PDF free and open-source?
Yes. Filestash is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Stirling PDF under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Filestash and Stirling PDF with Docker?
Filestash: yes. Stirling PDF: yes.