Magic Wormhole vs Puter

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?
FeatureMagic WormholePuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITAGPL-3.0
LanguagePythonTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM32 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinarydocker
GitHub stars★ 22,792★ 43,003
First released20162026
ReplacesWeTransfer, AirDrop

Why pick each one

Choose Magic Wormhole if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 22.8k GitHub stars
  • Written in Python
Magic Wormhole details

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Frequently asked questions

Is Magic Wormhole or Puter better?

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

Are Magic Wormhole and Puter free and open-source?

Yes. Magic Wormhole is licensed under MIT and Puter under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Magic Wormhole and Puter with Docker?

Magic Wormhole: check the project docs for container support. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons