Varnish Cache vs Apache Traffic Server

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

Not the right match-up?
FeatureVarnish CacheApache Traffic Server
CategoryReverse Proxy & GatewaysReverse Proxy & Gateways
LicenseBSD-2-ClauseApache-2.0
LanguageCC++
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binary, bare-metaldocker, binary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 4,050★ 1,972
First released20062009
ReplacesCloudflare, SquidVarnish, Squid

Why pick each one

Choose Varnish Cache if…

  • Released under the BSD-2-Clause license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (4k GitHub stars)
  • Written in C
Varnish Cache details

Choose Apache Traffic Server if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in C++
Apache Traffic Server details

Frequently asked questions

Is Varnish Cache or Apache Traffic Server better?

Neither is universally better. Varnish Cache has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Varnish Cache and Apache Traffic Server free and open-source?

Yes. Varnish Cache is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and Apache Traffic Server under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Varnish Cache and Apache Traffic Server with Docker?

Varnish Cache: yes. Apache Traffic Server: yes.

Related comparisons