head to head · open source
conductor vs workflow-core
conductor has 32,401 GitHub stars, 1,051 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. workflow-core has 5,939 stars, 1,261 forks, 133 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. conductor leads on adoption by 446% (32,401 vs 5,939 stars). conductor is written in Java under Apache-2.0; workflow-core is written in C# under MIT. conductor has attracted 3% as many forks as stars, workflow-core 21%. 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.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| conductor | workflow-core | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 32K | ★ 5.9K |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Written in | Java | C# |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-10-30 |
| Forks | ⑂ 1.1K | ⑂ 1.3K |
| 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
pick workflow-core if
- You want the workflow-core feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches C#
- You evaluated both and workflow-core fits your workflow better
About conductor
Conductor Durable Execution for Workflows and Agents Build agents that adapt. Run graphs that endure. Conductor is an open source durable execution platform for microservices, AI agents, and adaptive workflow graphs. It turns runtime choices—loops, branching, fan out, tool calls, approvals, retries, and cancellation—into durable, inspectable execution. It originated at Netflix and is actively maintained by Orkes and the community. Get Running in 60 Seconds Prerequisites: Node.js v16+ and Java 21+ must be installed. Open — your server is running with the built in ui next UI. Upgrading from a previous version? The…
read the full conductor overview →
About workflow-core
Workflow Core Workflow Core is a light weight embeddable workflow engine targeting .NET Standard. Think: long running processes with multiple tasks that need to track state. It supports pluggable persistence and concurrency providers to allow for multi node clusters. Announcements New related project: Conductor Conductor is a stand alone workflow server as opposed to a library that uses Workflow Core internally. It exposes an API that allows you to store workflow definitions, track running workflows, manage events and define custom steps and scripts for usage in your workflows. Documentation See Tutorial here…
read the full workflow-core overview →
More in Infrastructure & Operations
Related comparisons
More Orchestration & Scheduling projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Orchestration & Scheduling field.
Frequently asked questions
Is conductor or workflow-core more popular?
conductor has 32,401 GitHub stars and workflow-core has 5,939. conductor has the larger community by that measure.
Are conductor and workflow-core free?
Both are open source. conductor is licensed under Apache-2.0 and workflow-core under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between conductor and workflow-core?
conductor is written in Java and workflow-core in C#. 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 workflow-core?
Choose conductor if you want the larger community (32,401 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose workflow-core if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.