Kubo (IPFS) vs SFTPGo
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
SFTPGo
Full-featured SFTP, FTP and WebDAV server
| Feature | Kubo (IPFS) | SFTPGo |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 95 · Excellent | 94 · Excellent |
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, snap | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 17,139 | ★ 12,570 |
| First released | 2015 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Dropbox | Dropbox |
What are Kubo (IPFS) and SFTPGo?
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
SFTPGo
SFTPGo is a configurable file transfer server supporting SFTP, FTP/S, WebDAV, and HTTP access with cloud storage backends. It suits administrators who need secure, multi-protocol file access. It is deployed via Docker or a single binary.
- SFTP, FTP, WebDAV and HTTP support
- Cloud storage backends
- Per-user quotas and rules
- Web admin and REST API
Kubo (IPFS) vs SFTPGo: key differences
Both projects are written in Go. Licensing differs — MIT for Kubo (IPFS) versus AGPL-3.0 for SFTPGo. SFTPGo is the lighter option, starting around 128 MB of RAM against 512 MB for Kubo (IPFS). Kubo (IPFS) is the more established project (first released 2015), while SFTPGo arrived in 2019.
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
Choose SFTPGo if…
- Multi-protocol in one binary
- Flexible storage backends
- Strong access controls
Watch out for
- No sync client
- Configuration can be complex
Frequently asked questions
Is Kubo (IPFS) or SFTPGo better?
Neither is universally better. Kubo (IPFS) has the larger community, while SFTPGo is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Kubo (IPFS) and SFTPGo free and open-source?
Yes. Kubo (IPFS) is licensed under MIT and SFTPGo under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Kubo (IPFS) and SFTPGo with Docker?
Kubo (IPFS): yes. SFTPGo: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Kubo (IPFS) or SFTPGo?
SFTPGo has the smaller minimum footprint at 128 MB of RAM, compared to about 512 MB for Kubo (IPFS). Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.