Docker Volume Backup vs ZFS Autobackup

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?
FeatureDocker Volume BackupZFS Autobackup
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseMPL-2.0GPL-2.0
LanguageGoPython
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM64 MB128 MB
Deploymentdockerbare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 3,944★ 794
First released20212012
ReplacesVeeamVeeam

Why pick each one

Choose Docker Volume Backup if…

  • Released under the MPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.9k GitHub stars)
Docker Volume Backup details

Choose ZFS Autobackup if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
ZFS Autobackup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Docker Volume Backup or ZFS Autobackup better?

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

Are Docker Volume Backup and ZFS Autobackup free and open-source?

Yes. Docker Volume Backup is licensed under MPL-2.0 and ZFS Autobackup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Docker Volume Backup and ZFS Autobackup with Docker?

Docker Volume Backup: yes. ZFS Autobackup: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons