# Concat vs SeaweedFS

> 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 | 12 454 | 35 794 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 455 ✓ | +833 |
| 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 (+2 455 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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