Open Archiver vs Timeshift

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?
FeatureOpen ArchiverTimeshift
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseAGPL-3.0GPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptVala
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM512 MB128 MB
Deploymentdockerbinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 2,224★ 4,219
First released20262014
ReplacesTime Machine, System Restore

Why pick each one

Choose Open Archiver if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (2.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in TypeScript
Open Archiver details

Choose Timeshift if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Vala
Timeshift details

Frequently asked questions

Is Open Archiver or Timeshift better?

Timeshift is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Open Archiver if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Open Archiver and Timeshift free and open-source?

Yes. Open Archiver is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Timeshift under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Open Archiver and Timeshift with Docker?

Open Archiver: yes. Timeshift: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons