Pico vs Plasmic
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?
| Feature | Pico | Plasmic |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | PHP | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, source | docker, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,904 | ★ 6,945 |
| First released | 2012 | 2021 |
| Replaces | WordPress | Webflow, Contentful |
Why pick each one
Choose Plasmic if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 6.9k GitHub stars
- Written in TypeScript
Frequently asked questions
Is Pico or Plasmic better?
Neither is universally better. Plasmic has the larger community, while Pico is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Pico and Plasmic free and open-source?
Yes. Pico is licensed under MIT and Plasmic under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Pico and Plasmic with Docker?
Pico: yes. Plasmic: yes.