Keystone vs Umbraco
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted content management systems options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Keystone
Headless CMS framework with a powerful GraphQL API
VS
Umbraco
Friendly open-source .NET content management system
| Feature | Keystone | Umbraco |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | C# |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 9,938 | ★ 5,224 |
| First released | 2013 | 2005 |
| Replaces | Contentful, Strapi | Sitecore, Kentico |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Keystone or Umbraco better?
Neither is universally better. Keystone has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Keystone and Umbraco free and open-source?
Yes. Keystone is licensed under MIT and Umbraco under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Keystone and Umbraco with Docker?
Keystone: yes. Umbraco: yes.