SHSelfHostIndex

WG-Easy vs Wirehole

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?
WG WG-Easy The easiest way to run WireGuard VPN with a web UI VS WI Wirehole WireGuard, Pi-hole, and Unbound in one compose stack
FeatureWG-EasyWirehole
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseAGPL-3.0MIT
LanguageTypeScriptShell
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM128 MB256 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker
GitHub stars★ 26,595★ 4,967
First released20212020
ReplacesOpenVPN Access ServerNordVPN

Why pick each one

Choose WG-Easy if…

  • Extremely easy setup
  • Friendly UI
WG-Easy details

Choose Wirehole if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (5k GitHub stars)
Wirehole details

Frequently asked questions

Is WG-Easy or Wirehole 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 WG-Easy and Wirehole free and open-source?

Yes. WG-Easy is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Wirehole under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run WG-Easy and Wirehole with Docker?

WG-Easy: yes. Wirehole: yes.

Related comparisons