SHSelfHostIndex

Kubo (IPFS) vs OpenCloud

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

Not the right match-up?
KU Kubo (IPFS) Reference implementation of the InterPlanetary File System VS OpenCloud Modern open-source file platform from ownCloud team
FeatureKubo (IPFS)OpenCloud
Deploy effortUnder-an-hour setupUnder-an-hour setup
Health score95 · Excellent90 · Excellent
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITApache-2.0
LanguageGoGo
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binary, snapdocker
GitHub stars★ 17,139★ 6,056
First released20152025
ReplacesDropboxDropbox, Google Drive

What are Kubo (IPFS) and OpenCloud?

Kubo (IPFS)

Kubo is the reference implementation of IPFS, a peer-to-peer hypermedia protocol for decentralized file storage and sharing. It enables content-addressed distribution of files across a global network.

  • Content-addressed storage
  • Decentralized peer-to-peer network
  • HTTP gateway support

Read the full Kubo (IPFS) guide →

OpenCloud

OpenCloud is a modern open-source file sync, share, and collaboration platform built on a microservice architecture. It targets organizations wanting a current, lightweight content collaboration server. It is deployed via Docker Compose.

  • Microservice-based architecture
  • Web-based collaboration
  • Lightweight Go backend
  • Compatible desktop clients

Read the full OpenCloud guide →

Kubo (IPFS) vs OpenCloud: key differences

Both projects are written in Go. Licensing differs — MIT for Kubo (IPFS) versus Apache-2.0 for OpenCloud. Kubo (IPFS) is the more established project (first released 2015), while OpenCloud arrived in 2025. Kubo (IPFS) has the considerably larger community, at 17,139 GitHub stars versus 6,056.

Why pick each one

Choose Kubo (IPFS) if…

  • Content-addressed storage
  • Censorship resistant
  • Reference IPFS implementation

Watch out for

  • Heavy bandwidth chatter
  • Content vanishes without pinning
  • Concepts take learning
Kubo (IPFS) details

Choose OpenCloud if…

  • Modern, fast codebase
  • Lightweight footprint
  • Permissively licensed

Watch out for

  • Very new project
  • Smaller ecosystem so far
OpenCloud details

Frequently asked questions

Is Kubo (IPFS) or OpenCloud better?

Neither is universally better. Kubo (IPFS) has the larger community, while OpenCloud is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Kubo (IPFS) and OpenCloud free and open-source?

Yes. Kubo (IPFS) is licensed under MIT and OpenCloud under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Kubo (IPFS) and OpenCloud with Docker?

Kubo (IPFS): yes. OpenCloud: yes.

Related comparisons