Conduit File Sync vs Spacedrive

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?
FeatureConduit File SyncSpacedrive
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITAGPL-3.0
LanguageGoRust
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM128 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarybinary
GitHub stars★ 7,221★ 38,732
First released20132022
ReplacesDropboxGoogle Drive, Dropbox

Why pick each one

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
Conduit File Sync details

Choose Spacedrive if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • Mature project with 38.7k GitHub stars
  • Written in Rust
  • Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Spacedrive details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conduit File Sync or Spacedrive better?

Neither is universally better. Spacedrive has the larger community, while Conduit File Sync is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Conduit File Sync and Spacedrive free and open-source?

Yes. Conduit File Sync is licensed under MIT and Spacedrive under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Conduit File Sync and Spacedrive with Docker?

Conduit File Sync: yes. Spacedrive: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons