head to head · open source

copyparty vs cyberduck

copyparty has 46,729 GitHub stars, 1,905 forks, 252 open issues and last shipped yesterday. cyberduck has 4,786 stars, 369 forks, 506 open issues and last shipped yesterday. copyparty leads on adoption by 876% (46,729 vs 4,786 stars). copyparty is written in Python under MIT; cyberduck is written in Java under GPL-3.0. copyparty has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, cyberduck 8%. copyparty 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.

copyparty ★ 47K cyberduck ★ 4.8K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 15422 open source comparisons

Side by side

copyparty cyberduck
GitHub stars ★ 47K ★ 4.8K
License MIT GPL-3.0
Written in Python Java
Last push 2026-09-18 2026-09-18
Forks ⑂ 1.9K ⑂ 369
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick copyparty if

  • You weight community size — 47K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full copyparty profile →

pick cyberduck if

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

full cyberduck profile →

About copyparty

copyparty is a portable file server that turns almost any device into a file server with resumable uploads and downloads through any web browser, built for self hosters, homelab operators, NAS owners and anyone who wants to share files directly from their own hardware.

read the full copyparty overview →

About cyberduck

Cyberduck is a libre FTP, SFTP, WebDAV, Amazon S3, Backblaze B2, Microsoft Azure & OneDrive and OpenStack Swift file transfer client for macOS and Windows, released under the GNU General Public License version 3 and developed at the iterate ch/cyberduck repository.

read the full cyberduck overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K Browser Use ★ 115K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K

Related comparisons

localsend vs spacedrive localsend vs nextcloud localsend vs seafile localsend vs pairdrop localsend vs opencloud localsend vs owncloud localsend vs sync-in localsend vs hoodik openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More File Management & Sync projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the File Management & Sync field.

copyparty vs LocalSend copyparty vs rclone copyparty vs Files copyparty vs yazi copyparty vs Spacedrive copyparty vs Nextcloud copyparty vs uppy copyparty vs cloudreve copyparty vs Seafile copyparty vs PairDrop copyparty vs dufs copyparty vs OpenCloud

Frequently asked questions

Is copyparty or cyberduck more popular?

copyparty has 46,729 GitHub stars and cyberduck has 4,786. copyparty has the larger community by that measure.

Are copyparty and cyberduck free?

Both are open source. copyparty is licensed under MIT and cyberduck under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between copyparty and cyberduck?

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

Which should I choose, copyparty or cyberduck?

Choose copyparty if you want the larger community (46,729 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose cyberduck if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.