Aurora Filesvsjuicefs
Two self-hosted File Storage projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Aurora Files | juicefs | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 47/100 | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #10 of 15 in File Storage | #1 of 15 in File Storage |
| GitHub stars | 213 | 14 585 |
| Stars, last 30 days | — | +123 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 11 |
| Latest release | — | v1.4.2 · 22 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Shell | Go |
Which one should you pick?
juicefs scores 73/100 against 47/100 for Aurora Files, so it is the safer default.
juicefs ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Aurora Files.
If you want the quickest setup, juicefs is easier to run; Aurora Files needs more configuration.
juicefs is growing faster right now (+123 stars in 30 days).
Aurora Files details →juicefs details →All File Storage projects →
Swap a project
Keep Aurora Files, compare it with
Keep juicefs, compare it with