head to head · open source

conductor vs bisheng

conductor has 32,213 GitHub stars, 1,012 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. bisheng has 11,983 stars, 1,970 forks, 138 open issues and last shipped today. conductor leads on adoption by 169% (32,213 vs 11,983 stars). conductor is written in Java under Apache-2.0; bisheng is written in Python under Apache-2.0. conductor has attracted 3% as many forks as stars, bisheng 16%. bisheng was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

conductor ★ 32K bisheng ★ 12K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

conductor bisheng
GitHub stars ★ 32K ★ 12K
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Written in Java Python
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-09-20
Forks ⑂ 1.0K ⑂ 2.0K
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick conductor if

  • You weight community size — 32K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Java
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full conductor profile →

pick bisheng if

  • You want the bisheng feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and bisheng fits your workflow better

full bisheng profile →

About conductor

Conductor is an Apache 2.0 licensed, event driven agentic workflow engine written in Java that provides durable and highly resilient execution for applications and AI agents, aimed at teams running microservices, AI agents, and adaptive workflow graphs that need orchestration they can version, inspect, and recover.

read the full conductor overview →

About bisheng

BISHENG is an open source LLM DevOps platform, licensed under Apache 2.0, for building and operating next generation enterprise AI applications, and it is aimed at organisations that need GenAI workflows, RAG, agents, and model management to run inside their own infrastructure.

read the full bisheng overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

kubernetes ★ 128K Immich ★ 115K frp ★ 110K Uptime Kuma ★ 92K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K

Related comparisons

ansible vs conductor n8n vs kestra langchain vs haystack kubernetes vs rancher ansible vs compose ansible vs xxl-job ansible vs gitleaks ansible vs kestra n8n vs huginn uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana uptime-kuma vs prometheus netdata vs grafana kubernetes vs docker kubernetes vs kong kubernetes vs portainer kubernetes vs trivy kubernetes vs opentofu kubernetes vs jenkins kubernetes vs pulumi kubernetes vs floci

More Orchestration & Scheduling projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Orchestration & Scheduling field.

conductor vs ansible conductor vs compose conductor vs xxl-job conductor vs gitleaks conductor vs Kestra conductor vs haystack conductor vs rancher conductor vs Prefect conductor vs Archon conductor vs Temporal conductor vs rowboat conductor vs Trigger

Frequently asked questions

Is conductor or bisheng more popular?

conductor has 32,213 GitHub stars and bisheng has 11,983. conductor has the larger community by that measure.

Are conductor and bisheng free?

Both are open source. conductor is licensed under Apache-2.0 and bisheng under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between conductor and bisheng?

conductor is written in Java and bisheng in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, conductor or bisheng?

Choose conductor if you want the larger community (32,213 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose bisheng if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.