Puter vs transfer.sh

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?
FeaturePutertransfer.sh
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseAGPL-3.0MIT
LanguageTypeScriptGo
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM512 MB64 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 43,003★ 15,881
First released20262014
ReplacesWeTransfer

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 transfer.sh if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 15.9k GitHub stars
transfer.sh details

Frequently asked questions

Is Puter or transfer.sh better?

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

Are Puter and transfer.sh free and open-source?

Yes. Puter is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and transfer.sh under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Puter and transfer.sh with Docker?

Puter: yes. transfer.sh: yes.

Related comparisons