Kubo (IPFS) vs Nextcloud All-in-One

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?
FeatureKubo (IPFS)Nextcloud All-in-One
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITAGPL-3.0
LanguageGoPHP
Setup difficultyHardEasy
Min. RAM512 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentdocker, binary, snapdocker
GitHub stars★ 17,093★ 10,238
First released20152022
ReplacesDropboxDropbox, Google Drive

Why pick each one

Choose Kubo (IPFS) if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 17.1k GitHub stars
  • Written in Go
Kubo (IPFS) details

Choose Nextcloud All-in-One if…

  • Much simpler than manual setup
  • Backup and update built in
  • Officially supported
Nextcloud All-in-One details

Frequently asked questions

Is Kubo (IPFS) or Nextcloud All-in-One better?

Neither is universally better. Kubo (IPFS) has the larger community, while Nextcloud All-in-One is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Kubo (IPFS) and Nextcloud All-in-One free and open-source?

Yes. Kubo (IPFS) is licensed under MIT and Nextcloud All-in-One under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Kubo (IPFS) and Nextcloud All-in-One with Docker?

Kubo (IPFS): yes. Nextcloud All-in-One: yes.

Related comparisons