head to head · open source

conductor vs loonflow

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars, 1,010 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. loonflow has 2,089 stars, 704 forks, 19 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. conductor leads on adoption by 1,442% (32,207 vs 2,089 stars). conductor is written in Java under Apache-2.0; loonflow is written in TypeScript under AGPL-3.0. conductor has attracted 3% as many forks as stars, loonflow 34%. conductor was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (workflow-engine), 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.

conductor ★ 32K loonflow ★ 2.1K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

conductor loonflow
GitHub stars ★ 32K ★ 2.1K
License Apache-2.0 AGPL-3.0
Written in Java TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-05-25
Forks ⑂ 1.0K ⑂ 704
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 loonflow if

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

full loonflow 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 loonflow

Loonflow is an open source process automation platform for enterprises, built around ticket and workflow operations. It lives in the Django and Python web ecosystem, and the README also identifies React and MUI for the interface.

read the full loonflow overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

compose vs conductor conductor vs xxl-job compose vs xxl-job compose vs gitleaks compose vs kestra compose vs haystack compose vs rancher compose vs prefect uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma vs huginn worldmonitor vs huginn immich vs paperless-ngx immich vs ceph immich vs filestash immich vs garage immich vs storj immich vs alarik immich vs spinifex paperless-ngx vs ceph

More Orchestration & Scheduling projects

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

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 conductor vs dolphinscheduler

Frequently asked questions

Is conductor or loonflow more popular?

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars and loonflow has 2,089. conductor has the larger community by that measure.

Are conductor and loonflow free?

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

What is the difference between conductor and loonflow?

conductor is written in Java and loonflow in TypeScript. 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 loonflow?

Choose conductor if you want the larger community (32,207 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose loonflow if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.