head to head · open source

caddy vs zoraxy

caddy has 76,064 GitHub stars, 4,996 forks, 286 open issues and last shipped today. zoraxy has 5,490 stars, 323 forks, 159 open issues and last shipped yesterday. caddy leads on adoption by 1,286% (76,064 vs 5,490 stars). caddy is written in Go under Apache-2.0; zoraxy is written in HTML under AGPL-3.0. caddy has attracted 7% as many forks as stars, zoraxy 6%. caddy was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (golang, reverse-proxy), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

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

caddy ★ 76K zoraxy ★ 5.5K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

caddy zoraxy
GitHub stars ★ 76K ★ 5.5K
License Apache-2.0 AGPL-3.0
Written in Go HTML
Last push 2026-09-25 2026-09-24
Forks ⑂ 5.0K ⑂ 323
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick caddy if

  • You weight community size — 76K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full caddy profile →

pick zoraxy if

  • You want the zoraxy feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches HTML
  • You evaluated both and zoraxy fits your workflow better

full zoraxy profile →

About caddy

Caddy is a Go based, Apache 2.0 licensed HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, and HTTP/3 web server and reverse proxy that obtains and renews TLS certificates automatically by default, built for operators and teams who want every site on HTTPS without maintaining a separate certificate workflow.

read the full caddy overview →

About zoraxy

Zoraxy is a general purpose HTTP reverse proxy and forwarding tool, now written in Go, aimed at homelab owners, makers, and small operations teams who need to route traffic to several self hosted services without hand maintaining proxy configuration files.

read the full zoraxy overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

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

Related comparisons

frp vs caddy caddy vs traefik frp vs traefik frp vs adguardhome frp vs nginx frp vs algo frp vs nginx-proxy immich vs openvpn 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 n8n vs kestra langchain vs haystack kubernetes vs rancher ansible vs compose ansible vs conductor ansible vs xxl-job ansible vs gitleaks ansible vs kestra

More Networking & Connectivity projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Networking & Connectivity field.

caddy vs frp caddy vs traefik caddy vs AdGuardHome caddy vs nginx caddy vs algo caddy vs nginx-proxy caddy vs goproxy caddy vs openvpn-install caddy vs cloudflared caddy vs amnezia-client caddy vs OpenVPN caddy vs coredns

Frequently asked questions

Is caddy or zoraxy more popular?

caddy has 76,064 GitHub stars and zoraxy has 5,490. caddy has the larger community by that measure.

Are caddy and zoraxy free?

Both are open source. caddy is licensed under Apache-2.0 and zoraxy under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between caddy and zoraxy?

caddy is written in Go and zoraxy in HTML. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, caddy or zoraxy?

Choose caddy if you want the larger community (76,064 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose zoraxy if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.