SHSelfHostIndex

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone vs Rustic

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
BA Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone Cross-platform backup tool with deduplication and encryption VS RU Rustic Fast encrypted deduplicated backup compatible with Restic
FeatureBackblaze alt Kopia-UI StandaloneRustic
Deploy effortRead-the-docs projectRead-the-docs project
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguageRustRust
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM256 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary
GitHub stars★ 500★ 3,273
First released20202022
ReplacesTime Machine, BackblazeBackblaze, CrashPlan

What are Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and Rustic?

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone

Pika Backup is a simple desktop backup application for GNOME built on BorgBackup. It focuses on protecting personal data with encrypted, deduplicated, and compressed backups.

  • GNOME desktop backup app
  • Encrypted Borg archives
  • Simple scheduling

Rustic

Rustic is a backup tool written in Rust that creates fast, encrypted, and deduplicated backups. It is fully compatible with Restic repositories while offering lower memory usage.

  • Restic-compatible repositories
  • Low memory footprint
  • Cold storage support

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone vs Rustic: key differences

Both projects are written in Rust. Licensing differs — GPL-3.0 for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone versus Apache-2.0 for Rustic. Rustic is the lighter option, starting around 128 MB of RAM against 256 MB for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone. Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is the more established project (first released 2020), while Rustic arrived in 2022. Rustic has the considerably larger community, at 3,273 GitHub stars versus 500.

Why pick each one

Choose Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in Rust
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone details

Choose Rustic if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Active community (3.3k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Rust
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Rustic details

Frequently asked questions

Is Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone or Rustic better?

Neither is universally better. Rustic has the larger community, while Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and Rustic free and open-source?

Yes. Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Rustic under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and Rustic with Docker?

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone: check the project docs for container support. Rustic: check the project docs for container support.

Which is lighter on resources, Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone or Rustic?

Rustic has the smaller minimum footprint at 128 MB of RAM, compared to about 256 MB for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons