Puter vs Snapdrop

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

Not the right match-up?
FeaturePuterSnapdrop
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseAGPL-3.0GPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptJavaScript
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM512 MB64 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 43,003★ 19,707
First released20262017
ReplacesAirDrop

Why pick each one

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Choose Snapdrop if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 19.7k GitHub stars
Snapdrop details

Frequently asked questions

Is Puter or Snapdrop better?

Neither is universally better. Puter has the larger community, while Snapdrop is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Puter and Snapdrop free and open-source?

Yes. Puter is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Snapdrop under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Puter and Snapdrop with Docker?

Puter: yes. Snapdrop: yes.

Related comparisons