omnom vs Wallabag
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted bookmarks & read-it-later options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
omnom
Bookmarking with full-page snapshot archiving
VS
Wallabag
Self-hosted read-it-later application
| Feature | omnom | Wallabag |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Bookmarks & Read-It-Later | Bookmarks & Read-It-Later |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Go | PHP |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 653 | ★ 12,884 |
| First released | 2020 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Pocket, Raindrop.io | Pocket, Instapaper |
Why pick each one
Choose omnom if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Go
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Choose Wallabag if…
- Great read-it-later experience
- Own your reading list
- Apps available
Frequently asked questions
Is omnom or Wallabag better?
Neither is universally better. Wallabag has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are omnom and Wallabag free and open-source?
Yes. omnom is licensed under MIT and Wallabag under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run omnom and Wallabag with Docker?
omnom: yes. Wallabag: yes.