Rustic vs Timeshift

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?
FeatureRusticTimeshift
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseApache-2.0GPL-3.0
LanguageRustVala
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM128 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 3,170★ 4,219
First released20222014
ReplacesBackblaze, CrashPlanTime Machine, System Restore

Why pick each one

Choose Rustic if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Active community (3.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Rust
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Rustic details

Choose Timeshift if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Vala
Timeshift details

Frequently asked questions

Is Rustic or Timeshift better?

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

Are Rustic and Timeshift free and open-source?

Yes. Rustic is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Timeshift under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Rustic and Timeshift with Docker?

Rustic: check the project docs for container support. Timeshift: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons