Rclone vs SeaweedFS

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureRcloneSeaweedFS
CategoryBackup & RecoveryFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITApache-2.0
LanguageGoGo
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM128 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinary, dockerdocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 58,995★ 33,952
First released20142015
ReplacesBackblazeAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose Rclone if…

  • Works with almost any cloud
  • Extremely versatile
  • Reliable
Rclone details

Choose SeaweedFS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 34k GitHub stars
SeaweedFS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Rclone or SeaweedFS better?

Rclone is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider SeaweedFS if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Rclone and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

Yes. Rclone is licensed under MIT and SeaweedFS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Rclone and SeaweedFS with Docker?

Rclone: yes. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons