Signature PDF vs Stirling PDF
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted document management options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Signature PDF
Sign and manipulate PDFs with collaboration, organization, compression
VS
Stirling PDF
Powerful locally hosted web-based PDF toolkit
| Feature | Signature PDF | Stirling PDF |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Document Management | Document Management |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 818 | ★ 89,077 |
| First released | 2025 | 2023 |
| Replaces | — | Adobe Acrobat, Smallpdf |
Why pick each one
Choose Signature PDF if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in JavaScript
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Signature PDF or Stirling PDF better?
Stirling PDF is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Signature PDF if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Signature PDF and Stirling PDF free and open-source?
Yes. Signature PDF is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Stirling PDF under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Signature PDF and Stirling PDF with Docker?
Signature PDF: yes. Stirling PDF: yes.