copypartyvsRustFS
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| copyparty | RustFS | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 74/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 86 in File Sharing | #1 of 5 in Storage |
| GitHub stars | 47 163 | 35 499 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +390 | +1 767 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 | 5 |
| Latest release | v1.20.26 · 14 Oct 2026 | 1.0.4 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Rust |
Which one should you pick?
copyparty scores 82/100 against 74/100 for RustFS, so it is the safer default.
copyparty ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for RustFS.
If you want the quickest setup, copyparty is easier to run; RustFS needs more configuration.
RustFS is growing faster right now (+1 767 stars in 30 days).
copyparty details →RustFS details →
Swap a project
Keep copyparty, compare it with
Keep RustFS, compare it with