# automq vs SeaweedFS

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | automq | SeaweedFS |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 68/100 | 81/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #6 of 12 in Message Broker | #1 of 11 in Cloud Storage |
| GitHub stars | 10 921 | 35 794 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +71 | +869 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 28 ✓ |
| Latest release | 1.7.4 · 29 Aug 2026 | 4.51 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Java | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

SeaweedFS scores 81/100 against 68/100 for automq, so it is the safer default.

SeaweedFS ships more often: 28 stable releases in the past year, against 10 for automq.

If you want the quickest setup, SeaweedFS is easier to run; automq needs more configuration.

SeaweedFS is growing faster right now (+869 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [automq](https://selfhost.directory/project/automq) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/automq.md)
- [SeaweedFS](https://selfhost.directory/project/seaweedfs) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/seaweedfs.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/automq-vs-seaweedfs