Jangouts vs LiveKit
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted video conferencing options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Jangouts
Videoconferencing based on WebRTC and Janus Gateway with an UI
VS
LiveKit
Scalable WebRTC infrastructure for real-time audio and video
| Feature | Jangouts | LiveKit |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Conferencing | Video Conferencing |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 50 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker, kubernetes, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 444 | ★ 20,181 |
| First released | 2025 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Google Hangouts, Skype | Twilio, Agora |
Why pick each one
Choose Jangouts if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Written in JavaScript
- Tiny footprint — runs in 50 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Jangouts or LiveKit better?
Neither is universally better. LiveKit has the larger community, while Jangouts is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Jangouts and LiveKit free and open-source?
Yes. Jangouts is licensed under MIT and LiveKit under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Jangouts and LiveKit with Docker?
Jangouts: check the project docs for container support. LiveKit: yes.