head to head · open source

conductor vs werf

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars, 1,010 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. werf has 4,721 stars, 239 forks, 30 open issues and last shipped yesterday. conductor leads on adoption by 582% (32,207 vs 4,721 stars). conductor is written in Java under Apache-2.0; werf is written in Go under Apache-2.0. conductor has attracted 3% as many forks as stars, werf 5%. conductor 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 werf ★ 4.7K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

conductor werf
GitHub stars ★ 32K ★ 4.7K
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Written in Java Go
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 1.0K ⑂ 239
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 werf if

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

full werf 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 werf

werf is a CNCF Sandbox command line tool, written in Go and licensed under Apache 2.0, that implements full cycle CI/CD to Kubernetes for teams that already build container images and deploy with Helm but want one tool to carry an application from build through deploy, release artifacts and container registry cleanup.

read the full werf 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 werf more popular?

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars and werf has 4,721. conductor has the larger community by that measure.

Are conductor and werf free?

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

What is the difference between conductor and werf?

conductor is written in Java and werf in Go. 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 werf?

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