Ghost vs OJS
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted content management systems options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Ghost
Professional publishing platform for blogs and newsletters
VS
OJS
Software to manage scholarly journals
| Feature | Ghost | OJS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0-only |
| Language | JavaScript | PHP |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 50 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 54,707 | ★ 1,025 |
| First released | 2013 | 2024 |
| Replaces | WordPress, Substack, Medium | — |
Why pick each one
Choose Ghost if…
- Excellent for newsletters and memberships
- Clean, fast publishing experience
Choose OJS if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0-only license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (1k GitHub stars)
- Written in PHP
Frequently asked questions
Is Ghost or OJS better?
Neither is universally better. Ghost has the larger community, while OJS is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Ghost and OJS free and open-source?
Yes. Ghost is licensed under MIT and OJS under GPL-3.0-only. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Ghost and OJS with Docker?
Ghost: yes. OJS: check the project docs for container support.