SHSelfHostIndex

Snowflake SSH Client vs WG-Easy

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

Not the right match-up?
SN Snowflake SSH Client Graphical SSH and SFTP client with server monitoring VS WG WG-Easy The easiest way to run WireGuard VPN with a web UI
FeatureSnowflake SSH ClientWG-Easy
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseGPL-3.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM512 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinary, sourcedocker
GitHub stars★ 2,249★ 26,595
First released20192021
ReplacesMobaXterm, TermiusOpenVPN Access Server

Why pick each one

Choose Snowflake SSH Client if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (2.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Java
Snowflake SSH Client details

Choose WG-Easy if…

  • Extremely easy setup
  • Friendly UI
WG-Easy details

Frequently asked questions

Is Snowflake SSH Client or WG-Easy better?

Neither is universally better. WG-Easy has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Snowflake SSH Client and WG-Easy free and open-source?

Yes. Snowflake SSH Client is licensed under GPL-3.0 and WG-Easy under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Snowflake SSH Client and WG-Easy with Docker?

Snowflake SSH Client: check the project docs for container support. WG-Easy: yes.

Related comparisons