FlowInquiry vs OTOBO
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
FlowInquiry
Project management and ticket tracking with SLA monitoring
VS
OTOBO
Enterprise ticket system and service management
| Feature | FlowInquiry | OTOBO |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Project Management & Tasks | Helpdesk & Ticketing |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | HTML | Perl |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 170 | ★ 334 |
| First released | 2024 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Jira, Zendesk | ServiceNow, Zendesk |
Why pick each one
Choose FlowInquiry if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Written in HTML
Choose OTOBO if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Perl
Frequently asked questions
Is FlowInquiry or OTOBO better?
Neither is universally better. OTOBO has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are FlowInquiry and OTOBO free and open-source?
Yes. FlowInquiry is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and OTOBO under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run FlowInquiry and OTOBO with Docker?
FlowInquiry: yes. OTOBO: yes.