OpenCloud vs SeaweedFS

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?
FeatureOpenCloudSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageGoGo
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 5,792★ 33,952
First released20252015
ReplacesDropbox, Google DriveAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose OpenCloud if…

  • Modern, fast codebase
  • Lightweight footprint
  • Permissively licensed
OpenCloud details

Choose SeaweedFS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 34k GitHub stars
SeaweedFS details

Frequently asked questions

Is OpenCloud or SeaweedFS better?

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

Are OpenCloud and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

Yes. OpenCloud is licensed under Apache-2.0 and SeaweedFS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run OpenCloud and SeaweedFS with Docker?

OpenCloud: yes. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons