Winds vs Wallabag
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?
Winds
Beautiful open-source RSS and podcast application
VS
Wallabag
Self-hosted read-it-later application
| Feature | Winds | Wallabag |
|---|---|---|
| Category | RSS & News Readers | Bookmarks & Read-It-Later |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | PHP |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 9,115 | ★ 12,884 |
| First released | 2017 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Feedly | Pocket, Instapaper |
Why pick each one
Choose Winds if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 9.1k GitHub stars
- Written in JavaScript
Choose Wallabag if…
- Great read-it-later experience
- Own your reading list
- Apps available
Frequently asked questions
Is Winds or Wallabag better?
Wallabag is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Winds if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Winds and Wallabag free and open-source?
Yes. Winds is licensed under MIT and Wallabag under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Winds and Wallabag with Docker?
Winds: yes. Wallabag: yes.