ConcatvsSeaweedFS
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Concat | SeaweedFS | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 81/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 18 in Video Processing | #1 of 11 in Cloud Storage |
| GitHub stars | 12 397 | 35 793 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 398 | +868 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 28 |
| Latest release | v0.2.8 · 20 Oct 2026 | 4.51 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Rust | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Concat scores 82/100 against 81/100 for SeaweedFS, so it is the safer default.
SeaweedFS ships more often: 28 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Concat.
If you want the quickest setup, Concat is easier to run; SeaweedFS needs more configuration.
Concat is growing faster right now (+2 398 stars in 30 days).
Concat details →SeaweedFS details →
Swap a project
Keep Concat, compare it with
Keep SeaweedFS, compare it with