Pico vs Wagtail
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?
Pico
Stupidly simple flat-file CMS
VS
Wagtail
Developer-friendly Django CMS with a great editor experience
| Feature | Pico | Wagtail |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | BSD-3-Clause |
| Language | PHP | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,904 | ★ 20,433 |
| First released | 2012 | 2014 |
| Replaces | WordPress | Adobe Experience Manager, WordPress |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Pico or Wagtail better?
Neither is universally better. Wagtail 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 Wagtail free and open-source?
Yes. Pico is licensed under MIT and Wagtail under BSD-3-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Pico and Wagtail with Docker?
Pico: yes. Wagtail: yes.