Ghost vs Umbraco
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
Umbraco
Friendly open-source .NET content management system
| Feature | Ghost | Umbraco |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | C# |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 54,707 | ★ 5,224 |
| First released | 2013 | 2005 |
| Replaces | WordPress, Substack, Medium | Sitecore, Kentico |
Why pick each one
Choose Ghost if…
- Excellent for newsletters and memberships
- Clean, fast publishing experience
Frequently asked questions
Is Ghost or Umbraco better?
Neither is universally better. Ghost has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Ghost and Umbraco free and open-source?
Yes. Ghost is licensed under MIT and Umbraco under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Ghost and Umbraco with Docker?
Ghost: yes. Umbraco: yes.