Foam vs Wiki.js

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted notes & knowledge base options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureFoamWiki.js
CategoryNotes & Knowledge BaseNotes & Knowledge Base
LicenseMITAGPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptVue
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentsourcedocker, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 17,328★ 28,727
First released20202017
ReplacesRoam Research, ObsidianConfluence, Notion

Why pick each one

Choose Foam if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 17.3k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Foam details

Choose Wiki.js if…

  • Flexible and full-featured
  • Many auth options
  • Good content management
Wiki.js details

Frequently asked questions

Is Foam or Wiki.js better?

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

Are Foam and Wiki.js free and open-source?

Yes. Foam is licensed under MIT and Wiki.js under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Foam and Wiki.js with Docker?

Foam: check the project docs for container support. Wiki.js: yes.

Related comparisons