SHSelfHostIndex

Kubo (IPFS) vs Unison

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 UN Unison Bidirectional file synchronizer with conflict detection
FeatureKubo (IPFS)Unison
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITGPL-3.0
LanguageGoOCaml
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM512 MB64 MB
Deploymentdocker, binary, snapbare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 17,093★ 5,429
First released20151999
ReplacesDropboxDropbox

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 Unison if…

  • Very reliable
  • Fine-grained control
Unison details

Frequently asked questions

Is Kubo (IPFS) or Unison better?

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

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

Yes. Kubo (IPFS) is licensed under MIT and Unison under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

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

Kubo (IPFS): yes. Unison: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons