OpenCloud vs Conduit File Sync
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?
OpenCloud
Modern open-source file platform from ownCloud team
VS
Conduit File Sync
Lightweight folder synchronization for small teams
| Feature | OpenCloud | Conduit File Sync |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,792 | ★ 7,221 |
| First released | 2025 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Dropbox, Google Drive | Dropbox |
Why pick each one
Choose OpenCloud if…
- Modern, fast codebase
- Lightweight footprint
- Permissively licensed
Choose Conduit File Sync if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 7.2k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is OpenCloud or Conduit File Sync better?
Conduit File Sync is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider OpenCloud if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are OpenCloud and Conduit File Sync free and open-source?
Yes. OpenCloud is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Conduit File Sync under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run OpenCloud and Conduit File Sync with Docker?
OpenCloud: yes. Conduit File Sync: yes.