Conduit File Sync vs elFinder
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?
Conduit File Sync
Lightweight folder synchronization for small teams
VS
elFinder
Web file manager with a desktop-style interface
| Feature | Conduit File Sync | elFinder |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | MIT | BSD-3-Clause |
| Language | Go | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,221 | ★ 4,800 |
| First released | 2013 | 2010 |
| Replaces | Dropbox | Google 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
Choose elFinder if…
- Released under the BSD-3-Clause license
- Active community (4.8k GitHub stars)
- Written in JavaScript
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Conduit File Sync or elFinder better?
Conduit File Sync is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider elFinder if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Conduit File Sync and elFinder free and open-source?
Yes. Conduit File Sync is licensed under MIT and elFinder under BSD-3-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Conduit File Sync and elFinder with Docker?
Conduit File Sync: yes. elFinder: check the project docs for container support.