Restic vs ZnapZend
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?
Restic
Fast, secure, efficient backup program
VS
ZnapZend
ZFS-centric backup tool with mbuffer and ssh support
| Feature | Restic | ZnapZend |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Perl |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, docker | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 35,412 | ★ 668 |
| First released | 2015 | 2014 |
| Replaces | Backblaze, Carbonite | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose ZnapZend if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Written in Perl
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Restic or ZnapZend better?
Restic is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider ZnapZend if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Restic and ZnapZend free and open-source?
Yes. Restic is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and ZnapZend under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Restic and ZnapZend with Docker?
Restic: yes. ZnapZend: check the project docs for container support.