Kubo (IPFS) vs Zipline
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
| Feature | Kubo (IPFS) | Zipline |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 95 · Excellent | 88 · Excellent |
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Go | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, snap | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 17,139 | ★ 3,429 |
| First released | 2015 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Dropbox | Imgur, Dropbox |
What are Kubo (IPFS) and Zipline?
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
Zipline
Zipline is a fast self-hosted file upload server with a modern dashboard. It supports ShareX, image embeds, URL shortening, and detailed statistics.
- ShareX integration
- URL shortener built in
- Detailed upload statistics
Kubo (IPFS) vs Zipline: key differences
Kubo (IPFS) is written in Go, while Zipline is built with TypeScript. Zipline is the lighter option, starting around 256 MB of RAM against 512 MB for Kubo (IPFS). Kubo (IPFS) is the more established project (first released 2015), while Zipline arrived in 2021. Kubo (IPFS) has the considerably larger community, at 17,139 GitHub stars versus 3,429.
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 Zipline if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3.4k GitHub stars)
- Written in TypeScript
Frequently asked questions
Is Kubo (IPFS) or Zipline better?
Neither is universally better. Kubo (IPFS) has the larger community, while Zipline is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Kubo (IPFS) and Zipline free and open-source?
Yes. Kubo (IPFS) is licensed under MIT and Zipline under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Kubo (IPFS) and Zipline with Docker?
Kubo (IPFS): yes. Zipline: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Kubo (IPFS) or Zipline?
Zipline has the smaller minimum footprint at 256 MB of RAM, compared to about 512 MB for Kubo (IPFS). Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.