SeaweedFS vs slskd

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

Not the right match-up?
FeatureSeaweedFSslskd
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageGoC#
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, binarydocker
GitHub stars★ 33,952★ 3,698
First released20152026
ReplacesAmazon S3

Why pick each one

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

Choose slskd if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.7k GitHub stars)
  • Written in C#
slskd details

Frequently asked questions

Is SeaweedFS or slskd better?

Neither is universally better. SeaweedFS has the larger community, while slskd is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are SeaweedFS and slskd free and open-source?

Yes. SeaweedFS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and slskd under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run SeaweedFS and slskd with Docker?

SeaweedFS: yes. slskd: yes.

Related comparisons