SHSelfHostIndex

Restic vs Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup

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

Not the right match-up?
RE Restic Fast, secure, efficient backup program VS BA Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup Time Machine-style backups for Linux and macOS using rsync
FeatureResticBackup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseBSD-2-ClauseMIT
LanguageGoShell
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM256 MB32 MB
Deploymentbinary, dockerbinary
GitHub stars★ 35,412★ 3,608
First released20152014
ReplacesBackblaze, CarboniteTime Machine

Why pick each one

Choose Restic if…

  • Strong encryption
  • Efficient deduplication
  • Wide backend support
Restic details

Choose Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (3.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Shell
Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Restic or Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup better?

Neither is universally better. Restic has the larger community, while Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Restic and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup free and open-source?

Yes. Restic is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Restic and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup with Docker?

Restic: yes. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons