mailcow vs MailCatcher
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted mail servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
mailcow
Dockerized full-stack mail server suite
VS
MailCatcher
Catch-all SMTP server for inspecting test email
| Feature | mailcow | MailCatcher |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Mail Servers | Mail Servers |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 6,144 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 13,245 | ★ 6,774 |
| First released | 2016 | 2010 |
| Replaces | Microsoft Exchange, Google Workspace | Mailtrap |
Why pick each one
Choose MailCatcher if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 6.8k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is mailcow or MailCatcher better?
Neither is universally better. mailcow has the larger community, while MailCatcher is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are mailcow and MailCatcher free and open-source?
Yes. mailcow is licensed under GPL-3.0 and MailCatcher under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run mailcow and MailCatcher with Docker?
mailcow: yes. MailCatcher: yes.